The release of a new film from Steven Soderbergh should be a fairly big deal. As should the not-quite-original but still very rare decision to premiere a film online several weeks before it hits theaters.

Yet there's no apparent promotion going on around "The Girlfriend Experience," Soderbergh's tittilating new feature about a high-end call girl involved with politicians that is became available to rent at Amazon.com last Thursday, three weeks before it's in theaters. I only found out about it through a Gizmodo link.

It seems like a pretty big deal that this is the only place you can find the film. Yet there's just one small link to it very far down Amazon's video-on-demand section page (and nothing on the main home page). And with the exception of the words "pre-theatrical rental" in the title bar, the film page doesn't even mention that the movie isn't out in theaters (it even incorrectly states that the movie was released on Jan. 1).

Combine that with a higher-than-average $9.99 price to rent it for three days (understandable since it's pre-release, but still higher than most of us are used to paying to rent a film for our computers or, if we have the right device, televisions) and it's no surprise that the film is only #61 on Amazon's charts and has exactly zero customer reviews.

It's hard to understand what distributor Magnolia Films is thinking here. If you're going to break the rules, piss of a bunch of big theater chains, and try to reshape the way entertainment is distributed, why not make a stink about it? There's nothing worse than rebelling in a way that people don't notice, or even care.

Two great futuristic gadgets from 80s movies may finally be arriving.

New Scientist brings word of an LED camera that fits in the eye of filmmaker Rob Spence, who has had a prosthetic since he was a child and is attempting to film what that eye would be seeing. The result is that Spence looks like a self-described "eyeborg" and strongly resembles arguably the most badass movie villain of the '80s:

Engadget, meanwhile, has the scoop on the closest we're going to come to the hoverboard from "Back to the Future." The Scarpar is an off-road "powerboard" that moves with a handheld controllers and can smoothly ride in sand, on snow, or even over logs. As Engadget aptly puts it, this demo video is sick. We'll all be rolling along like Marty McFly Jr. in no time.

Geeks rejoice! Now the iPhone can turn into a phaser. Or at least it can make annoying noises like one.

Paramount's digital entertainment group has released a "Star Trek: Phaser" application to promote its upcoming movie. It's allegedly a game, with a very basic mechanic where players shoot a reticule in order to earn points.

But the real fun is the noise. Aim the iPhone at someone you love want to torture in "free play" mode and push "stun" or "kill" to generate authentic sound effects from the film. It's not too tough to imagine Trekkers pointing and shooting at each other, or at non-fans who need to be instructed in the awesomeness that is Captain Kirk.

It may just be the greatest iPhone app since the "That's What She Said" button. (Sorry "Star Wars" fans, but they both blow your lightsaber app out of the water)

All kidding aside, using applications to turn the iPhone into any handheld device from a movie is a smart and simple promotional tool for studios. It's surely no mistake that Paramount is giving out "Star Trek: Phaser" for free on the iTunes store and includes trailers and movie photos along with it. After all, any time someone sets their iPhone on stun, they and everyone around them will probably end up thinking about the movie.

Made-for-Web production has become a very difficult business in the past year. So it's perhaps no  surprise that after making a big splash in the space with "Jackass 2.5" in late 2007, Paramount Digital Entertainment has been quiet on the Web front.

But today comes news it's making a second try, working with French production company Gaumont on "Section 8." This one won't be streamed or sold online as a full movie, like "Jackass." Instead, Paramount plans to stream six-to-nine minute episodes on the Web and then collect the whole thing into a DVD and even a theatrical feature.

The primary factor holding back original online video hasn't been a glut of product, as many might have expected a year or two ago, but monetization problems. Digital download numbers remain paltry compared to DVD sales and advertising money isn't yet close to what can be made from the same content on TV.

Paramount's solution is apparently to go back to that oldest of funding methods: product integration and advance overseas sales. The studio is working with Endemol to handle both, which is why the project was unveiled now, going into the MIP TV conference in Cannes.

What exactly is "Section Eight?" Paramount isn't telling. It won't even say yet who's writing and producing. All we know is that it's an "interactive short-form serial thriller" that will debut this fall, with an exclusive window on MySpace before hitting other platforms like Hulu and iTunes. And viewers will actually get to vote on the end of the series (Another old school throwback -- I remember doing with a 900 number for an "A-Team" episode as a kid in the '80s).

Zak Knutson and Joey Figueroa of Chop Shop Entertainment get brought in by big studio films and indie projects to produce electronic press kits and other promotional materials, which for them, since at least 2006, includes webisodes. Recent projects include the indie feature "The Art of Travel", starring Christopher Masterson, and Kevin Smith's "Zack and Miri Make a Porno" and "Clerks II". (Below is one of the shorts they produced for "Zack and Miri," an Elizabeth Banks-Seth Rogan parody of the "I'm F****ing Matt Damon" video from last year.)

Making webisodes is their number 1 tip for filmmakers looking to get the word out about their projects, as they explained in a panel this morning at the South By Southwest Interactive conference. And their sub-tips include:

• Film everything, at least as much as you can. Chop Shop spent a year with the "Zack and Miri" production team, filming every stage of the film's creation.
• The faster you put up your footage, the more the audience feels involved. Chop Shop managed to upload a webisode filmed at Cannes the same day they shot it, and the viewcounts went huge.
• Commit to regularly producing content, because your audience will look forward to it. You can't necessarily anticipate what will take off, but if you keep producing content, something will attract attention.
• Use viewcounts as a way to determine what's working and what's not working for the audience. And the basic rules of the Internet apply: "If you've got pretty girls, your stats are going to go up," Figueroa said.

In the final part of our discussion with Lionsgate's digital media president Curt Marvis, former CEO of CinemaNow, we discuss what went wrong (and right) at his former company, his company's approach to video games, and what technology he thinks could be "the new DVD for the film business."

(For more background on Marvis, see the introduction to part 1. Read part 2 here.)

Ben Fritz: How did you feel about CinemaNow’s sale a few months ago?

Curt Marvis: So to speak… (Laughter) [CinemaNow, in which Lionsgate had a 21% stake, was acquired by Sonic Solutions in November for $3 million. Over its lifetime it raised more than $40 million in venture capital.]

BF: Yea, so to speak. Obviously that’s not what you were thinking in 1999, I’m sure. Was there a pointing the past couple of years where the studios were taking a different tack and iTunes was succeeding and CinemaNow wasn’t where it needed to be? Was CinemaNow only useful for its technology in the end?

CM: The biggest mistake that we ever made in the operation of CinemaNow is we started way, way, way too early. No one could have predicted that. Keeping a company that wasn’t profitable in business for 10 years was kind of miraculous, really.

I think what really happened is that that entity still needed a lot of investment and to create a real business out of it is still going to take time. And we were in an environment where that was when the market crashed we were in the middle of raising a round and the existing investors said we just cant put more into this. We’ve tried and we’ve tried and we’ve tried and it’s always been “next year… next year… next year… next year…”

CinemaNow I think is following the strategy it has been following for a number of years which is to get away from being a destination site and focus its efforts on being a backend supplier of other peoples’ businesses on a branded or white label business. It’s gaining a lot of traction in that regard. There are some deals that haven’t been announced. The Blockbuster thing was announced [In January, Blockbuster signed up CinemaNow to power its Movielink digital download service. Movielink, which was bought by Blockbuster in late 2007, was CinemaNow’s primary competitor for many years] and we’ll see how that pans out.

CinemaNow’s going to get a shot to succeed as a business. Whether it does or not, I’m not sure.

BF: Is there some kind of personal vindication to see Blockbuster buy Movielink and then they need to use CinemaNow to run the thing?

CM: I can’t say I was disapp—It was ironic to have that happen.

I’m proud of what CinemaNow achieved as a groundbreaking company. I’m obviously horribly disappointed in what it achieved as an investment and an ultimate financial success.

Part 2 of our three-part discussion with Lionsgate digital media president Curt Marvis, former CEO of CinemaNow.

Here we discuss what types of content sell best in digital, how the business model for online distribution of movies and TV is challenging old Hollywood and how Lionsgate is handling it, his approach to original content on the Web, and why Lionsgate's new TV show "Instantly Rich" is a "stimulus package for the television industry."

(For more background on Marvis, see the introduction to part 1)

Ben Fritz: Lionsgate more than other studios has strengths in some specific genres. Do you see any genre-specific differences? Does the horror stuff overperform in digital? Does stuff like the Tyler Perry films sell less than on other platforms? What do you see doing the best in digital?

Curt Marvis: It actually in many ways I think mirrors homevideo. I think you’ll see maybe an R-rated comedy like “Good Luck Chuck” or “My Best Friend’s Girl” that didn’t necessarily blow the doors off theatrically outperform relative to the box office on digital in a significant fashion. I think there’s a lot in that R-rated comedy area where we’ve seen tremendous success, both in homevideo and on digital.

Horror always does well on homevideo and the same on digital.

BF: But is there anything that does better on digital than traditional homevideo?

CM: Definitely the R-rated uncensored versions of comedies and even action movies. I would say there’s a few cases where it may do better digitally.

One interesting thing you find about digital is placement is so huge in terms of the performance of a title. That’s true at retail too – obviously you want an endcap at Wal-Mart or wherever it is. But an interesting thing that maybe somebody will figure out – we didn’t do it at CinemaNow and I haven’t seen anybody do it yet – is I still make the argument that browsability is still superior in the retail environment than online.

We found it’s amazing people watch what’s either on the home page or the first page of the specific genre or category they go to. Very few people start to click through pages. If you go into a Blockbuster or Best Buy it’s actually much easier to take a broad swath and look over and go, “You know, I haven’t seen ‘Chinatown,’ I’m going to buy that movie.”

BF: So you think there’s still a lot of work to be done on user interfaces?

CM: Yeah, honestly I don’t know the best way to do it, but somebody’s got to figure out a more effective way to – Netflix has done a great job of it through the collaborative filtering and personalization. There’s still I think, just like Google came up with a simple way to search, somebody’s got to come up with a simple way to browse a movie library in a more effective fashion.

BF: In terms of the online digital distributors, who do you see doing really well? iTunes? The video game consoles? Amazon? Is there anybody you’ve been particularly impressed by or anyone who hasn’t done as well as you thought?

When it comes to digital media in Hollywood, Curt Marvis is one of the most senior veterans around. The co-founder of online movie retailer CinemaNow all the way back in 1999, he saw the dot-com economy boom and bust in Hollywood and lived to tell about it. For nearly a decade, he served as CEO and kept his company alive in a battle against the studio-backed Movielink, waiting for the day when broadband would spread and business models would relax in order to make the Internet the distribution mode of choice for home entertainment. (CinemaNow was acquired by Sonic Solutions in November for $3 million)

That day still isn’t quite here, but Marvis is continuing to bring it closer, now on the studio side. Last April he joined Lionsgate, a major investor in CinemaNow, as its first president of digital media, overseeing all of the mid-sized studio’s efforts on new digital platforms.

Last week, Marvis spoke to Technotainment editor Ben Fritz about his role at Lionsgate, his experience at CinemaNow, and where he sees sees the digital economy going for Hollywood in the future.

In this first of three parts, Marvis explains how he has come to define his position, the importance of online sales and rentals in the overall revenue for some Lionsgate movies, and his surprise at where digital distribution stands now compared to 10 years ago.

Ben Fritz: Tell me about your job. Is it overseeing anything and everything that Liongsate does digitally?

Curt Marvis: Basically I got this job with a piece of paper and I drew “digital media” in the middle in a circle and drew arrows out to theatrical, television, home entertainment, even music – we have a music group, which a lot of people don’t realize – corporate development, business development, channel business and then investor/financial community. And I listed in each of those all the different things that I could imagine were happening in those different departments that I knew within Lionsgate didn’t really have a lot of glue or communication between the groups. To use the overused term: Synergies between the various groups.

So I basically came in to Jon Feltheimer, the CEO, and said, “Look, if I came in here, this is what I would” – Because I had been at CinemaNow and I had reached a point where I was… They couldn’t pay me any more money. I could get stock that at that point was looking like it wasn’t necessarily going to be worth a lot of money. I started the company and I didn’t have the fire in my belly to keep going. So as an entrepreneur there was a point at which I said I’ve got to get in something new. So I came here and drew that out for him and said, “Here’s the things I think we need to be looking at in home entertainment, here’s a list of 20 things, etc.” He said, “Exactly, that’s what we want somebody to do” and by the end of the moment it was, “When do you start?”

So effectively what my job is is interfacing with all those groups on a multitude of challenges, problems, opportunities that exist within each one of those departments. What I’m least involved in really is theatrical and that’s because the one thing that I don’t do within the company is deal with the theatrical marketing or the homevideo marketing. I don’t go into the theatrical marketing people and say, “Hey, I think you should do pop-up ads on Yahoo Movies.”

BF: So it’s not the marketing, it’s the distribution?

CM: Basically you could say, if it’s not revenue-generating, I’m probably not involved in it. So in the home entertainment group, for example, I get involved in everything from shifting windows, pricing issues, iTunes stuff, everything moving from the packaged goods business to the digital world. In the television world we just made an announcement today about a format we licensed from Spain called “Instantly Rich” that we’re going to be taking out to the networks. It’s driven by SMS. It’s a show that I brought into the company from our relationship with Zed.

 We also are doing things with “Weed” and “Mad Men.” And also we work with the TV Guide Network (which Lionsgate just acquired) and TVGuide.com in terms of cross-platform programming for television.

On the music side, mainly I’m dealing with getting those tracks out with ringtones and other things.

Then on the corporate channel side, because of Epix, which is the movie service we’re launching with Viacom, Paramount, and MGM. We have FearNet which is our all-horror VOD service. We have a large stake in Break.com. All of those businesses have their own management teams. I’m not in charge of those businesses by any means. But I’m an interface in the company.

waMovie studios and TV networks are always asking how much content to give away online for publicity without giving away so much people won't bother buying a ticket or tuning in.

Warner Bros. has apparently decided that the super stylish opening credits sequence of "Watchmen" is a step too far. Motionogrpher, a website that covers filmmaking and motion graphics, posted the sequence on its blog, only to see it taken down by WB. The blogger left the note "I will never understand Hollywood’s approach to free publicity. Persistent souls will still find the titles elsewhere online."

Business Insider, from which I got the link, concurs, stating, "Bad move, Warner. The sequence, which probably used less total footage from the film than any of Warner's poorly produced trailers, wasn't anything but free publicity for a film that needs help at the box office." (A questionable assertion after a solid if not spectacular opening weekend, but we'll leave that aside)

Although right now the "elsewhere" link takes you to a page that doesn't work. And I couldn't find any working links to the sequence on YouTube either. WB seems to have the kibosh on it, for the moment.

Motionographer can't understand why, but I can. I think it's pretty reasonable not to give away such a great sequence from the film, at least this early in release. Studios often wait until a movie has been out a week or two to put more clips on the Web, partially to deal with the inevitable piracy and partially to draw audiences who aren't part of the fanboy crowd that pays lots of attention and rushes out opening weekend.

There's one other small matter: The opening credits of "Watchmen" are set to a song called "The Times They Are A'Changing" by an artists named Bob Dylan. You might have heard of it and of him. I'm going to guess that's an expensive song to license and WB may not have the rights to just drop it the Web for publicity purposes.

Update: This post previously said that the blog belonged to f/x firm yU+Co that worked on the sequence. That was incorrect.