HIPSTER RUNOFF

This blog post talks about the current climate of 'indie film making.' Apparently, since Avatar made so much money, it seems like generating mainstream mega hits is a better business model for studios than investing a lil bit of money in an indie film, and hoping it goes' critically viral' [via Oscar nomination].

If you are a producer of indie movies, the great sucking sound you may be hearing is Avatar draining money from your future projects. While this brilliant Pocahantas-meets-Jurassic Park mashup may be a bonanza for Rupert Murdoch's 20th Century Fox studio, which gets a distribution fee on every dollar it brings in from theaters, video stores, and TV, and its producer-director James Cameron, who gets a cut of the gross after it reached its Hollywood-defined $500 million cash break even point, it will further convince the heads of the major studios that their salvation lies in putting their money in "high value" movies laden with mesmerizing visual effects that can be simultaneously opened on more than 5,000 screens around the world and lend themselves to sequels, merchandise tie-ins, toy licensing, and theme parks rides.

Guess the era of 'indie movies financed by studios is over.'

If so how can Indie producers continue to make movies? They might be able to find wealthy individuals entranced enough with a movie fantasy to put up the money, but they still need to devise a new way in this digital age to distribute them to an audience willing to see something more than the movie versions of amusement park rides.

Do u think this means 'indie films' are dead, or will this just mean 'real indie films' will be made, instead of mindie films?
What advice would u give to a young indie filmmaker?
Is Avatar better than Garden State?
Are mnstrm films 'better' than 'indie films marketed to the mainstream as an alternative product'?