I enjoyed my annual pilgrimage to Sundance Film Festival a couple of weekends ago to get a sneak preview of thought provoking edgy movies. I saw 7 movies (The Matador, Brothers, Why We Fight, 3 Iron, On A Clear Day, Forty Shades of Blue and a collection of shorts) and there were only 2 bad movies which is actually better than the 50/50 hit rate that I have typically had over the past 7 years.
This got me thinking about whether there were lessons I could learn from film making and apply them to venture capital. Many observers more erudite than I have commented on the similarity between Hollywood and Silicon Valley. Kevin Laws for example has written some thoughtful posts on this subject. Suffice it to say that I believe, as with any analogy, there are insights to be gained from understanding what is similar AND what is different. Overreaching the analogy leads to simplistic and erroneous conclusions (e.g. in Hollywood there are actors who guarantee box office success, while there is no CEO/founder who can guarantee success in a startup).
This year's Sundance experience raised two questions for me. First, have I become a better picker after 5 visits to/30+ movies at Sundance? Second, surely when a movie is SO bad someone associated with the movie must recognize this during the making?
After some reflection I believe I have become a better picker because I have developed a better process. I go for the second weekend, not the first, so I can benefit from the "buzz". I search for films on the basis of director, actor, screenwriter, subject. I remember movies I liked and disliked and match against similar traits. I remember reviewers I agree and disagree with. It's not always at a conscious level but I have developed some level of pattern recognition, eventhough I cannot always articulate it. Interestingly the two movies I did not like where 1) the grand prize winner (so I did not really pick it, the critics did) and 2) the collection of shorts (which was an experiment). Of course the acid test shall be if I continue to pick better than 50/50. Gives me a good excuse to keep going to Sundance to indulge my craving for new movies.
The second question was a timely reminder for me of the importance of always doing due diligence with the people in the middle of the action. The CEO/director will always tend to present a rosy picture. But the engineer/cameraman always knows that the product/film is going to be a disaster. The trick is 1) finding this person 2) asking them the right questions (they will rarely volunteer information) and 3) understanding their motivation.
P.S. If you get a chance to see Why We Fight don't miss it. It's Fahrenheit 911 without the polemic and a focus on the system (military-industrial complex) rather than on individuals (the Bush family).
Comments