>>3540132a24 and blumhouse aren't indie. They're investment firms responsible for financing a genre of films that include some that could be described as indie. They follow a basic mould of a starter production firms which have a long history in Hollywood that spans at least up to american new wave. Start small, dream big. As of now, they're insignificant, that could change, but if they do they'll quickly cut ties with things that got them there. No, the real attack that will surely shuffle the cards anew comes from the likes of Amazon, and Netflix. These are the players that have the power to revitalize the genre, albeit on the grounds of completely destroying classical cinema going experience.
What's happening today is comparable to demise of studios system with advent of television. Same diminishing interest in the genre is happening, but contrary to the past, owners just don't give a fuck, everyone big is already in the hands of a mighty media conglomerate to which film is a side attraction that can be dumped any given time. Indie is strong, has a voice, but by itself can't change anything unless it finds new distribution means. Cinema is not an option, studios still have a firm grasp of theatres, leaving no screening time for the minor players, while digital is nearly monopolised, with Netflix already showing it's dirty hands by forcing own political agendas to the front. Either you bend and do what they want you to do, or your vice is void.
