This week will be remembered as the beginning of the Great Gold Rush among creators. I don't need to rehash the backstories of Curry Barker or Kane Parsons, or their endlessly cited box office hits. The real treasure hunt has begun.
VidCon, the annual online video technology convention taking place at the end of June, will be thronged with agents and producers looking for the next great YouTube creator. And I'm confident they'll find one.
For those who want to be among them (and even for those who don't), I want to offer a conceptual framework for understanding this shift, and it's not "YouTube is now independent film," or "Audiences want original films," or even "This proves it has its own fandom," though all of those things may be true.
There is an even more powerful force at work here, and here it is: institutions will tend to perpetuate the problem they are the solution to.
This wisdom isn't mine. It's the "Shirky Principle" by Clay Shirky, who was smarter than any of us about the internet and predates it. Nearly a century ago, Upton Sinclair had his own version: It's hard to make a person understand something if his salary depends on his not understanding it.
In this case, we're talking about traditional Hollywood, which is thrilled that this young, fresh source of box office hits is finally emerging.
These days, everyone wants to be the next Blumhouse or Atomic Monster: Atomic noticed the rise of Kane Pixels' YouTube channel (thanks to an assistant from 21 Laps), and Blumhouse saw potential in Barker's short film "The Chair" and his feature film "Milk and Serial," which was made for $800.
I don't want to diminish their contribution to the success of Behind the Scenes and Whiplash - or the contribution of A24, Chernin Group, or Focus Features, which are all companies with rich histories.
History, however, shows that the first thing Hollywood tries to do with a blockbuster is not only figure out how to replicate its success, but also turn it into a reliable source of revenue, preferably one that can start turning a profit in the fourth quarter of 2027.
This will not happen.
Barker and Parsons created content publicly, for the audience that chose them. Their craft developed openly—on platforms with instant feedback, with communities that followed every iteration, with the creative pressure that comes with knowing the success or failure of your next video depends on whether people want to watch it.
It's a development process, but it won't survive a Hollywood development deal with its inorganic infrastructure of money, expectations, and deadlines. Instead of building for people who will watch, it builds for those who will let you watch.
It's easy to draw a parallel: these filmmakers (like Markiplier, who avoided all the obstacles) had a YouTube audience. Yes, that's true, but they also had a distinct, hard-won creative identity that viewers perceived as authentic.
Barker's sense of horror has been shaped over years, constantly refined in public. The universe of Parsons' "Behind the Scenes" possesses an internal logic and authentic atmosphere, crafted episode after episode. Markiplier has won his audience thanks to his decades of experience, consistent involvement in projects, and the creation of content for viewers.
It worked, but it has nothing to do with how Hollywood works. And Hollywood will likely try to lure creators over to its side rather than change its own approach to work.
As films like "Behind the Scenes" and "Obsession" demonstrate, Hollywood can excel at marketing and maximizing the promotion of an artist's work. However, Hollywood is also notorious for its disdain for audiences; executives' work depends on proving their own value to the process.
Frankly, it's hard to imagine what change would look like. Perhaps providing development funds in exchange for priority deal review and an ironclad promise to leave them alone?
In the worst-case scenario, Hollywood will see YouTubers as a ready-made audience and reduce marketing risks, after which it will begin searching for the next Barker, Parsons, or Markiplier based on subscriber count.
Numbers are a lagging indicator of what really matters: whether a person has developed genuine creative authority in a given community over time. Creators who are caught in unfavorable deals over the next 18 months will mistake Hollywood's sudden interest for recognition of their merits.
My unsolicited advice: please keep in mind that Hollywood is trying to import an asset it can't create internally. It's leverage, and it should be treated as such.
Film studios perceive this as a turning point, and they're right, but a turning point for studios means an opportunity to acquire rights. For filmmakers, it means an opportunity to gain a favorable negotiating position at a time when the system needs them more than they need it.
The question that faces every creator and director entering this conversation right now is: what are you giving up, and at what point in the leverage cycle do you give it up?
This is a story about independent cinema, focused primarily on the audience, with platforms being secondary. Barker, Parsons, and Markiplier have created a version of what the independent film movement has always theoretically valued: works created outside the studio system, connected to a real audience, and preserving the director's unique vision.
The difference is that their platforms have provided them with direct feedback and distribution, something the old independent model lacked. While Sundance offered a chance to build a career, YouTube can build one continuously, publicly, without asking permission.
Festivals are no longer the primary means for showcasing the vision of a particular type of filmmaker. The new tool is 78 million views and a community that already knows your name.
This is a completely different kind of independent film. It has nothing in common with the old models. It doesn't need a standing ovation to know it works.
Top 5 Prospects for the Future of Filmmaking
Weekly recommendations compiled by IndieWire editor-in-chief Christian Zilko.
5. Oscar Boyson and Alice Mayo Mackay on connecting with fans (by Max Seah)
Two of the most compelling voices in contemporary independent film are charting a realistic path to audience engagement in an increasingly fragmented marketplace. Boyson (director of Our Hero, Balthazar) and McKay (whose often low-budget films, including Snakeskin, are a regular at genre film festivals) represent two distinct paths to success in independent film, and their combined perspectives are invaluable.
4. "The New Project": 5 Takeaways from the Press Publish LA Conference and the Real State of Play in the Context of Content Creators and Hollywood Bringing Together (Mitch Camarada).
The fusion of online content and traditional Hollywood infrastructure appears set to be a major theme this year and, along with artificial intelligence, could become one of the trends defining the entertainment industry in the 2020s. This review of a recent symposium offers another inside look at the issues facing studios and content creators.
3. Nothing's Going to Stop Us (by Seth Hernandez and Maysoon Zayid)
This study examines how audience demand for socially conscious films is often far greater than those who control access to such material would have us believe. Hernandez and Zayid analyze the success of their documentary, "Invisible," using data to illustrate the value of positive portrayals of people with disabilities and explain the future direction of their careers.
2. 50 Film Festivals Worth Paying an Entry Fee for 2026 (Tim Molloy)
MovieMaker's annual list of festivals worth submitting to has long been an indispensable tool for filmmakers trying to develop their festival strategies. Even with the evolution of independent film, most feature filmmakers still submit their work to these or those festivals, and this list continues to be a useful annual reference for anyone thinking about how to promote their next project.
1. "Three-Minute Pilot" by John Stahl
Hollywood creators have always thrived under constraints, especially on television. The rigid 22-minute episodic format forced writers to hone their craft in storytelling, character development, and humor. Now, Stahl argues that the proliferation of short-form online content could lead to a similar renaissance if writers embrace the opportunity to hone their craft while working within the format's constraints.
Subscribe to the Indiewire newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.