The Power Triangle: Decoding the Film Industry's Holy Trinity
There’s a question that’s been lingering in the air at this year’s Locarno Pro, and it’s not about the next big film or the latest streaming deal. It’s far more fundamental: Power. People. Data. Three words, endless permutations. But which comes first? And why does the order even matter?
Personally, I think this isn’t just a semantic debate—it’s a window into the soul of the film industry. At a panel moderated by AC Coppers, three heavyweights—Yasmine Talli (mk2 Films), Andrea Occhipinti (Lucky Red), and Doris Ruth Eikhof (Design Otherwise)—offered wildly different takes. What makes this particularly fascinating is how their perspectives reveal deeper truths about creativity, risk, and the human element in an increasingly data-driven world.
Power, Data, People: The Eikhof Equation
Eikhof’s take—power, data, people—is the most structural of the three. She argues that fixing power structures and the narratives we tell (via data) creates a space where people can thrive. From my perspective, this feels like a top-down approach, almost utopian in its logic. But what many people don’t realize is that this order assumes data is neutral. It’s not. Data is shaped by those in power, which raises a deeper question: Can we ever truly separate the three?
People First: The Occhipinti Instinct
Occhipinti flips the script, putting people at the forefront. His argument—people, power, data—is rooted in intuition and experience. He’s the guy who bet on Ida and Moonlight, films that defied data-driven predictions. What this really suggests is that conviction can trump algorithms. But here’s the kicker: Lucky Red still uses data, just not as a decision-maker. They test audience reactions, which is data in disguise. It’s a nuanced approach that acknowledges the human element without dismissing analytics.
People, Data, Power: The Talli Strategy
Talli’s order—people, data, power—feels like a pragmatic middle ground. She admits that data is essential for maintaining power, but it’s not the starting point. A detail that I find especially interesting is her emphasis on “comparables”—films that aren’t identical but share market potential. This isn’t just about numbers; it’s about storytelling in a commercial context. mk2’s group decision-making process also highlights something often overlooked: power isn’t just held by individuals; it’s distributed across teams.
Conviction vs. Algorithms: The Eternal Debate
One thing that immediately stands out is how both Occhipinti and Talli prioritize human judgment over algorithms. Occhipinti’s examples of Ida and Moonlight are case studies in trusting your gut. But let’s be real—not every film can be a Moonlight. If you take a step back and think about it, the film industry’s reliance on data is a double-edged sword. It minimizes risk but also stifles innovation. Stephen Follows’ presentation at StepIn, with its hard truths about nepo babies and indie film profits, underscores this tension.
The Hidden Implication: Who Controls the Narrative?
What many people don’t realize is that the order of power, people, and data isn’t just about decision-making—it’s about control. Eikhof’s focus on power structures hints at systemic issues, while Occhipinti’s people-first approach feels like a rebellion against the machine. Talli’s strategy, meanwhile, is a pragmatic acknowledgment of the industry’s realities. But here’s the broader perspective: In an era where AI is creeping into every corner of filmmaking, who gets to decide what stories get told?
The Future: A Balancing Act
If there’s one takeaway, it’s that the film industry can’t afford to ignore any of these three elements. Personally, I think the future lies in finding a balance—a hybrid model where data informs but doesn’t dictate, where power is distributed but not diluted, and where people remain at the heart of the process. What this really suggests is that the industry’s survival depends on its ability to adapt without losing its soul.
In my opinion, the debate at Locarno Pro isn’t just about the order of words—it’s about the future of storytelling itself. And that, my friends, is a conversation worth having.
