anyone submiting to Sundance

Sort by date Sort by votes
"In that respect you have to be able to look at your work objectively"


That's really the key. Being able to have a realistic idea of what you have. I have gotten a lot of kind words on The Island, but it's not a Sundance film, it's not even a Slamdance film. It's on the margins of being good enough to get into a mid-tier festival, and got in a couple (and got rejected by even more). I hope the new film 109 is better, maybe a solid mid-tier festival film, maybe a Slamdance film. However it won't be a Sundance, Tribeca, etc... film. For the "little guy" to get into a festival of that caliber he has to have made a very, very special film.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
DeJager said:
I would still submit to Sundance or Slamdance knowing that my movie may never got reviewed. I'd rather roll the dice and take the chance that somebody out there would notice my film. Money is meant to be spent and sometimes you have to take a chance!!
Click to expand...
I agree with ussinners.

No argument if that's how you want to spend your money. Sometimes
it's better to wisely spend your money than to just roll the dice. There
are some interesting festivals that you would have a real shot at getting
into. When I was submitting my feature I researched festivals that were
likely to accept it. I was still at 22 submissions and 7 accepted, but I know
I didn't just toss money at very successful fests that I had no chance of
getting into except by the roll of the dice.

I believe in taking a chance. I believe in understanding the odds.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I don't think it's possible to look at your own work objectively. Plus, the judges (of any festival) are not looking at it objectively. Everything we're doing is 100% subjective, by it's very nature. The only reason I'm not submitting to Sundance is because I've heard so many bad things about them not being about the little guy, and behind-scenes-politics, that I just want nothing to do with them, and I figure mine would be one of the DVDs that they never even look at.

But for the other "big" festivals, SXSW, TIFF, Slamdance, LAIFF, fuck yeah I'll roll my dice. I guess it'd be one thing if I were submitting a short, then the money spent might really weigh on my brain. But for a feature? I dedicated a year of my life making this damn thing, it'd be an injustice to do anything other than to at least try to get it into the best venues possible. A year of my life is a much bigger investment than an entrance fee, so money can kiss my ass.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Playing it safe isn't always the best route. I've lived my whole life on "Go Big or Go Home". It's always important to be educated in whatever you do, but sometimes going AGAINST the odds pays off big. Sometimes you lose. You just have to be willing to acknowledge you may lose out on the money. I'd only submit to Sundance if I truly felt I had a quality film, not some home video.

I also believe the "I'm just the little guy" mentality is a barrier and even an excuse at times that keeps a lot of talented filmmakers from ever being successful. It's fostered this stigma that comes with being an indie filmmaker and all it does it create bitterness. Remove this "I'm just a micro budget filmmaker and can't compete with the big boys" then it's just one less thing to hold you back. I know some of you that have been in the field longer may be jaded but you gotta keep swimmin! :)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
When you're in the throws of making a movie, it is impossible to be objective. You do the best you can. You finish the movie and send out DVDs. You get good or bad reviews. A while down the road you sit down and watch the movie with fresh eyes. It's at this point where objectivity kicks in. Because the process has faded. Eventually to grow as an artist you have to be able to say "Wow that sucked" or "That was great". "I could have done this better" or "If only I'd have done that".

Judges at festivals are looking for quality. I can have a great story with great acting and if some boring movie with terrible acting has better production values, they will probably be chosen. If some cheesy movie has a cameo with a name, then they trump all. It's all about asses in the seats.

As far as being "The little guy", we are the little guys. But, that doesn't mean we have to just settle. Micro-Budget has such incredible limitations that it makes it nearly impossible for success. But, if you improve with each movie, you can eventually find a nitch to making a living from film making. It's like being in an indie band with a cult following. It's not that hard. You just have to work a hundred times harder to earn a fraction of what the major studios pull in.

Anyone should be able to compete with the major studios. Unfortunately, what's popular nowadays? Action block busters with crap blowing up every two minutes. God forbid you have a steady shot for a minute. Major motion pictures have become crap, and the masses still flock to see them. A great example is Rob Zombie films, they make money, and they SUCK.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Zensteve said:
There was one forum member who had something show at Cannes. Forgot his name... he was from the French part of Canada, and his film was extremely experimental. He showed the trailer in the Screen Room forum here, and most people seemed to find it cryptically interesting. (I just didn't get it).

Last we heard, he was packing his bags and headed out the door to fly to Cannes. That was the last we ever heard of him. No updates. No aftermath. No reports... and never logged in since.

Cannes...

Nothing to do with Sundance. Just sayin', sometimes those big festivals can swallow a man up whole...
smiley_ghost.gif
Click to expand...
That was BelangerRRRRRRR.

http://www.indietalk.com/member.php?u=16605

I actually thought his teaser for 'Raymond may have Rabies' was interesting. Would have liked to have seen the short.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top