watch Film as Competition?

[Flicker Pictures]

I "compete" with myself in that I try to one-up my previous work on each new project. It doesn't always happen, but that's the hope anyway.

Film festivals, contests and competitions have their place and serve a purpose; rarely for monetary gains, sometimes for that "stamp of approval" from peers, but mostly for a little exposure and to have fun with other filmmakers. Never hurts to keep your skills sharp!

 

[Will Vincent]

Every filming day is an 8/hr film festival anyway.

Only 8 hrs? Wow.. you let your cast/crew off easy.

 

[sonnyboo]

I "compete" with myself in that I try to one-up my previous work on each new project.

That's the only competition I know of.

 

[trueindie]

Hey IDOM,
I was going through your profile and saw that you've taken part in a lot of 48hr festivals. I'm not knocking anyone for doing that. I myself indulged myself in doing all these competitions for commercials with poptent in 2012. I did quite a few of them. I decided in the end that it was no good for me. I'd rather just do my own thing.

The one good thing it did do was provide a reason to shoot. And that's always a good thing. But I've got a lot of my own stories lying around, and I wasn't winning anything (I won $250 for the year), so I just thought I'd concentrate on my own thing.

Also, it depends on what you want to do. If someone wants to run and gun it, then these competitions are great. I don't enjoy running and gunning, so I suppose they're not for me.

Will Vincent
Only 8 hrs? Wow.. you let your cast/crew off easy.

Yeah, I'm pretty good at timing. But my shoots are fairly simple. If you plan those out, and concentrate on doing some things well instead of everything, you can get things done quickly.

But I still get pushback. Any first time filmmakers always think that I took too long, because I wrapped at 7pm, when I told everyone we'd wrap at 6pm. Then they go work on someone else's short until 2AM. Then the next time I call them, they're quite happy when I go over by an hour or two.


I once went on till 1:30AM, but the call time was 6PM. The actress was very upset with me. What can I do? The trouble is when you tell people we'll be done at 12pm and go over by an hour and a half, people get even more upset than if you told them, we'll be done at 3 and then finish at 2. Then everyone will be happy. This is my plan for the future. I'll overestimate. Everybody will be happy with me.

 

[Cracker Funk]

I'm competitive as shit. Growing up with four brothers and three sisters will do that to ya. When I enter a competition, I plan to win.

I've had a lot of fun taking part in the 48HFP a few times. The first couple times I did it, I absolutely wanted to win. The more experienced I became with it, the more I just wanted to enjoy the process of making a film that I could be proud of, and hopefully getting a positive reaction from the audience. The actual awards can go fuck themselves, and I sincerely mean that.

I wish my job wasn't so seasonal, and that our slowest time wasn't right in the middle of the Summer. I'm a bartender, so the weekends are obviously when I make my money, and every time I've done the 48HFP it's taken a huge financial toll on me. If it weren't for that, I'd do it again, simply because it's fun.

For now, I have to remain a spectator. Perhaps someday I'll have a "normal" job, one that doesn't require me to work on weekends.

 

[sonnyboo]

The one good thing it did do was provide a reason to shoot.

Competition doesn't motivate me in the slightest. That's why this is a very subjective thing because I can concede that competition DOES motivate other people, even to the point of driving them to do "better", as if art can be truly quantified in such a way.

 

[TheLoganDaniels]

Sonnyboo,

I was wondering why the last couple of these have seemingly ended a bit suddenly? It seems you are ramping up and about to do the usual wrap but instead the videos just end.

I should also point out that I agree with you. Art is always subjective and no matter how many people tell you something sucks, if you like it, you like it.

 

[ItDonnedOnMe]

It may be semantics, but running in a race without trying to win is not a sport - it's exercise.

In the immortal words of (not) Ernest Hemingway "There are but three true sports - bull fighting, mountaineering, and motor-racing; all the rest are merely games".

I myself indulged myself in doing all these competitions for commercials with poptent in 2012. I did quite a few of them. I decided in the end that it was no good for me. I'd rather just do my own thing.

I personally dislike PopTent and similar competitions, or things like Dorito's superbowl commercial contests, because they're basically spec work which I think is harmful to the production industry. To me that's very different than the 48 hour competitions where you're really just making the film for yourself, just within a set of guidelines.

You buy a good microphone, and you buy a nice boompole, your sound still sucks. You find out you need a better recorder, with less gain or whatever, so you buy one for your next film. The sound still sucks on your next film. And then you find out that you need a pre-amp, but then you find out it costs too much money. So you can decide to spend on a pre-amp or hire a human who already owns one. These kind of decisions come over time, over more than a year sometimes. How the 48hr film adds to this, I don't understand.

I guess you could take a lot of time to make those decisions, or you could take a weekend to learn the same stuff. Whatever you prefer. But that's also all stuff you probably could have figured out sitting around and reading IT. Things like figuring out what equipment you need to get the best results isn't the kind of learning I'm talking about - you could have all that stuff but until you actually have to put it to use you haven't really learned how to make a film. Sure you can practice on your own, but there's something different about being on a deadline you don't have any control over.

You take away the planning part, you've taken away the part that requires the filmmakers dedication and lonely hard work, what then is the difference between one guy and the next. The filmmaking shooting part is easy. That's when all the filmmakers are together and there's camaraderie and everyone's having a good time. But it's mostly in the planning, in the writing and in your alone time that one filmmaker carves out the difference between himself and the next person.

You see, I feel the opposite - to me the planning part is the easy part, and the execution is the challenge. A great concept with poor execution doesn't generally make for a good film; whereas excellent execution can turn even a weak concept into something worth watching. So it doesn't matter if you spend four years planning, or four hours - in the end all that matters is how well you execute that plan.

But that's the thing with filmmaking; there are a lot of different ways to go about it. What you're describing is the way Hitchcock worked; he was known to be disappointed when the planning phase was over because that was where he made the films. Part of that was out of necessity of course - he planned things as precisely as possible to leave no room for the studio to screw things up later. But he did seem to genuinely prefer the pre-production phase to actual production.

I subscribe to the philosophy that "a film is made three times - when it's written, when it's shot, and when it's edited". I consider myself a filmmaker, not a writer, producer, director, or editor. To me those are all just bits of the whole, and a filmmaker shapes the film at every stage to produce a finished piece that is distinctively theirs. So to say the planning part is what makes the difference between one filmmaker and the next seems to greatly discount the degree to which the voice of the film emerges long after the planning is over.

In a 48 hr film festival, you deprive the filmmaker to do this, and you cut off everyone's feet and ask them all to run.

Constraints can drive creativity - I don't see it as cutting anything off. It's more like adding some hills to the course you're asking everyone to run, so that they have to push themselves harder than if it were just a flat course.

The more experienced I became with it, the more I just wanted to enjoy the process of making a film that I could be proud of, and hopefully getting a positive reaction from the audience. The actual awards can go fuck themselves, and I sincerely mean that.

That's really where I'm at as far as the competitive aspect of the projects are concerned - the awards I'm most proud of are the audience choice ones. Even more than winning the awards though is being there in the audience and watching 200 people react to the film in the way you'd hoped - or occasionally, far better than you could have imagined. If you've watched any of our films I think you'll agree that at best they could be described as 'quirky', if not strange, weird or just plain odd. We primarily make stuff that entertains us, and we're usually not at all sure how it will be received by a general audience. So when we go out and jump over some strange ledge the best part is finding out the audience actually is there to catch you as you fall.

 

[WalterB]

I'm totally with you Sonny. I also never understood the 48hr/24hr film festival. Yeah, let's go to picasso, give him a limited number of paint, a torn canvas, and time him. ridiculous.

He would make an insane amount of sketches.
They aren't really finished pieces of work like his paintings, but there are musea displaying his sketches. I've seen hundreds of them in a German museum.

Are they any good?
Some people find it inspiring to see...
One thing is sure: it helped Picasso to work on his skills and ideas.


Like said before: we are competing for eyeballs, but I like the running metaphore: everytime trying to beat yourself is the way to get better and better.

 

[trueindie]

I personally dislike PopTent and similar competitions, or things like Dorito's superbowl commercial contests, because they're basically spec work which I think is harmful to the production industry. To me that's very different than the 48 hour competitions where you're really just making the film for yourself, just within a set of guidelines.

I am no longer a fan of poptent, but I really don't see the difference. In a 48hr film fest and for poptent, you're making films within guidelines. Maybe guidelines inspired by different things, but guidelines nonetheless, and guidelines not inspired by the filmmaker. Pot and kettle maybe, but not much more of a difference.

I guess you could take a lot of time to make those decisions, or you could take a weekend to learn the same stuff. Whatever you prefer. But that's also all stuff you probably could have figured out sitting around and reading IT. Things like figuring out what equipment you need to get the best results isn't the kind of learning I'm talking about - you could have all that stuff but until you actually have to put it to use you haven't really learned how to make a film. Sure you can practice on your own, but there's something different about being on a deadline you don't have any control over.

Ok. I just don't see what I can learn on a 48hr film fest that I can't learn on my own planned project. I can definitely see more things that I can learn while shooting my own project.

...
I was writing out in detail why I'm so vehemently opposed to this timed competition idea. But it's taking too long, and nobody is going to agree with me anyway. Until I can prove it otherwise, I'll keep my thoughts to myself for now.

You see, I feel the opposite - to me the planning part is the easy part, and the execution is the challenge. A great concept with poor execution doesn't generally make for a good film; whereas excellent execution can turn even a weak concept into something worth watching. So it doesn't matter if you spend four years planning, or four hours - in the end all that matters is how well you execute that plan.

A great concept does not equal great planning. A concept can be great and can be poorly executed. But if you need anything well executed, you shouldn't count on the concept, you should count on the planning.

I subscribe to the philosophy that "a film is made three times - when it's written, when it's shot, and when it's edited". I consider myself a filmmaker, not a writer, producer, director, or editor. To me those are all just bits of the whole, and a filmmaker shapes the film at every stage to produce a finished piece that is distinctively theirs. So to say the planning part is what makes the difference between one filmmaker and the next seems to greatly discount the degree to which the voice of the film emerges long after the planning is over.

We are what we are in our heads, and that's fine. I consider myself a director. But I write, and I produce and I edit, and I shoot, and light at the moment (none of them to any real satisfaction), which I'm sure you do too, because of capital constraints. If the funding was there, I'd only concentrate on directing.

Yes there is a lot of creative control in the editing room, but anybody editing for me is going to be seriously constrained. My films are pretty much edited when I'm shooting. There's not much room to tell a different story. I write, and then I write a shooting script, where camera movement or non movement or closeup or cut is written in the script, almost like a continuity script. And I follow it. There's not that much room for creativity during the shoot. I don't know if it's a good thing or a bad thing. I find that I learn quite a bit this way. So when I actually plunk some cash down on a shoot, I'll have a reasonable guage of whether I'll be able to pull it off or not.

Constraints can drive creativity - I don't see it as cutting anything off. It's more like adding some hills to the course you're asking everyone to run, so that they have to push themselves harder than if it were just a flat course.

I don't disagree that constraints can drive creativity to overcome that constraint. I'd rather spend any creativity I have towards artistic superiority, and spend another day on the project, instead of spend that creativity to overcome time constraints. I'm not trying to be clever. I just don't see the merit/superiority of this artificially imposed constraint on an artistic endeavor.

That's really where I'm at as far as the competitive aspect of the projects are concerned - the awards I'm most proud of are the audience choice ones. Even more than winning the awards though is being there in the audience and watching 200 people react to the film in the way you'd hoped - or occasionally, far better than you could have imagined. If you've watched any of our films I think you'll agree that at best they could be described as 'quirky', if not strange, weird or just plain odd. We primarily make stuff that entertains us, and we're usually not at all sure how it will be received by a general audience. So when we go out and jump over some strange ledge the best part is finding out the audience actually is there to catch you as you fall.

I've seen your films. Yes they're quirky, but I thought they were enjoyable. I don't remember which ones were for competition. But sure, I can see 200 people having a good time watching them. And if that's the thrill you're going for, keep doing it. I myself can attest, that there's nothing better, in this world, than watching an audience laugh when you want them to, or make a sound that you want them to when you want them to. There's nothing better.

I'll argue with you another day. But I am truly opposed to 48hr film projects as learning events. It may be good for the soul, it obviously is for yours, but I am vehemently opposed to them now. I think these things are destructive to good filmmaking habits in the long run. If short films are the goal, fine. If the goal is a 72+ minute film that tells a coherent story, and tells it well, not in a typically indie film fashion, but in the fashion of say, Another Earth, or Tiny Furniture, or Sound of my voice, there is no way that I know how one would do it other than by planning. Planning is everything. And I'm not talking about concept.

Cheers

 

[trueindie]

He would make an insane amount of sketches.
They aren't really finished pieces of work like his paintings, but there are musea displaying his sketches. I've seen hundreds of them in a German museum.

Are they any good?
Some people find it inspiring to see...
One thing is sure: it helped Picasso to work on his skills and ideas.


Like said before: we are competing for eyeballs, but I like the running metaphore: everytime trying to beat yourself is the way to get better and better.

I know what sketches you're talking about. I know people who own such sketches, by famous artists who practiced and threw a sketch away, and then my friends dad picked up the thrown away sketch, asked the artist to sign it, and has since sold that piece. I'm sure all artists do that kind of practice sketching. But I think they're practicing a planned execution, of a bird, or a flower, or a landscape, and not a timed execution of a bird, or a flower, or a landscape. That's my point. That is all I'm arguing for. I don't see how a time constraint would make picasso draw a bird better. And I don't understand why everybody else cannot also see this to be a killer of good art. Write a poem in 24 hrs... teaches what? Great poetry was probably inspired. How can great poetry, or literature, or painting be anything other than inspired? How could it possibly be timed? How is film different? Why is it that not everybody is on the same page as me on this subject? Why the hell is it only me who's screaming foul? WTF is wrong with all these goddamn filmmakers? Why can't they see what is evident to me? Or is it me who is just totally f**king insane?

These are the questions I grapple with when I go to sleep.
Cheers

 

[sfoster]

I share your distaste for timed filmed competitions
Just not your enthusiasm

 

[sonnyboo]

Sonnyboo,

I was wondering why the last couple of these have seemingly ended a bit suddenly? It seems you are ramping up and about to do the usual wrap but instead the videos just end.

I thought they wrapped up okay. Then again, I'm kind of a moron, and definitely a terrible host, but I'm the cheapest 'talent (hahahahahahahahahaha)' I can find, in that no one with talent was available for free so I stepped up and did it myself.

 

[Scoopicman]

Regarding the comments on 48HFP, which I think is a good thing: It's been a while since I made something, but 48HFP is coming up in my city. For me, it's motivation to get off my ass and shoot something, because it's a lot of fun.

I'm not particularly a fan of things like the 48hr and filmracing, et al.....In my opinion these kind of competitions encourage rushed, sloppy work. Sure, there are occasionally decent shorts produced during these competitions, but by and large it's a plethora of sloppy crap.

Maybe you should go to more, because there are more diamonds in the rough, each year. In general, I've made around 50 shorts, but I feel some of my best work happened the few times I participated in 48HFP, because of the pressure/motivation of other filmmakers being around and watching. Plus, it's really cool to see them in a theater.

Two that I shot, scored, edited:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdruwjYD1zU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWLtdhqZ-3w


What was really cool, is that my wife (who does not come from acting background) won "Best Actress" for each of those. An unexpected side effect of her help, which made it all worth it, for me.

There's a difference between competition of completed work and work that is produced for the sole purpose of competition.

My friend, Greg Parker, would often point out that 90% of "filmmakers" on all forums were just talkers and didn't do much production. What makes a lot of people uncomfortable about a "competition" is that they actually have to produce something and do it fast. Anyone who has a few years of production experience should not have a problem with that, while procrastinators...... Well, you get the point.

I have other friends who are pretty good filmmakers, but they take 4 years to make a short movie. They hate the idea of 48HFP. I don't see 48 being a lot different than working for a production house or studio. You get more time, but you are still working on a schedule and a budget.

Constraints can drive creativity - I don't see it as cutting anything off. It's more like adding some hills to the course you're asking everyone to run, so that they have to push themselves harder than if it were just a flat course.

Exactly. What happens with 48HFP is that you get a genre that you would have not picked yourself. You have to stretch your wings to work outside of your preference and that can create happy, creative results that you never would have thought of trying.

 

[Will Vincent]

I have other friends who are pretty good filmmakers, but they take 4 years to make a short movie. They hate the idea of 48HFP. I don't see 48 being a lot different than working for a production house or studio. You get more time, but you are still working on a schedule and a budget.

Those production house/studio projects aren't writing a script with specific genre/character/prop requirements within the 48hr window that the thing needs to be produced, finished, and delivered in.

I don't have a problem with schedule and budget, I work within schedules and budgets for my day job constantly.
I have a problem with the basic idea of the 48hr (and others like it) itself.

 

[trueindie]

My friend, Greg Parker, would often point out that 90% of "filmmakers" on all forums were just talkers and didn't do much production. What makes a lot of people uncomfortable about a "competition" is that they actually have to produce something and do it fast. Anyone who has a few years of production experience should not have a problem with that, while procrastinators...... Well, you get the point.

So I can't have an intellectual disagreement about the merits of 48hfp? I must be somehow afraid of competition or a procrastinator? For the record, I'm not even competitive. I've never wanted to win anything in my life. My siblings always took my stuff, and it never bothered me. If they enjoyed it it was fine with me. I don't care about competitions. I follow the Springsteen doctrine "tonight, nobody wins, unless everybody wins." I don't wanna win a damn thing.

I have other friends who are pretty good filmmakers, but they take 4 years to make a short movie. They hate the idea of 48HFP. I don't see 48 being a lot different than working for a production house or studio. You get more time, but you are still working on a schedule and a budget.

So either I take 4 years to make a short, or I have to be able to do it in 48hrs? I think there's ample room for lots of people in between.

Exactly. What happens with 48HFP is that you get a genre that you would have not picked yourself. You have to stretch your wings to work outside of your preference and that can create happy, creative results that you never would have thought of trying.

So stretching your wings and doing genres not native to you gives you inspiration. That's great. Maybe it doesn't do it for me. Just because it doesn't, means I'm less creative than you?

You're right. 90% of filmmakers on forums may be talkers, but 90% of filmmakers think that only their sh*t is creative. If it's not an alien invasion, it's "dull." You think Spielberg would give the kinds of reviews that pepper this site?

I watched both of your films, and they were both enjoyable, but are any of your films, or any of my films worthy of getting you or me a job somewhere? If yes, then I guess you've arrived. If not, then what the hell are we doing? Do we want to remain amateurs, or do we want to play in the big leagues? Do we want to perfect our craft, or do we just want to be "creative" and produce the same sh*t everybody else is producing?

 

[Scoopicman]

So I can't have an intellectual disagreement about the merits of 48hfp? I must be somehow afraid of competition or a procrastinator?

I don't know - can you have an intellectual disagreement? Then, let's have one. I have no idea of what you've produced, but don't you and I go way back to the early days of IndieClub? (I was Mike Conway over there. Well, I still am!) Anyway, I'm sensitive about what people say about indie flicks and their venues. What inclined me to post was Will's statement about 48HFP - "by and large it's a plethora of sloppy crap." That may have been more true when 48 started out, but each year, the quality goes up. I've participated 5 years and attended others.

I was also a judge (along with Sonnyboo), for the Cleveland 48 Hour Horror Fest. What a great time!!! I watched all the movies, multiple times. What I have noticed is that there is a lot of good stuff being shot. Some of it is downright amazing. In many cases, constraints and competition produces fruit.

I don't care about competitions. I follow the Springsteen doctrine "tonight, nobody wins, unless everybody wins." I don't wanna win a damn thing.

Okay, then we can disagree on that. As for myself, I believe in competition. When I wrestled and played football, winning was important to me. When I take on any task, I want to succeed at it. I'm a capitalist at heart. My wife refuses to play Scrabble with me, because she says I'm a bad winner.

So either I take 4 years to make a short, or I have to be able to do it in 48hrs? I think there's ample room for lots of people in between.

Of course. But a lot of people knock 48, because they can't do it. Period.

So stretching your wings and doing genres not native to you gives you inspiration.

Doing different genres and assigned elements in short time becomes an equalizer. It takes people out of the comfort zone and forces them to think on their feet. Thinking on your feet is important for any film work, as actors may not show up, the weather might not cooperate, the lead car breaks,... but you find a way to do it. Competition pushes you and that's a good thing, if you can ride the waves. If not, it's bad...

You're right. 90% of filmmakers on forums may be talkers, but 90% of filmmakers think that only their sh*t is creative.

Anybody who finishes a move is creative and I love you! I was referring to people who talk about making and haven't made a thing. Those who have, have my support for what they do. Making a movie is hard. Being a critic is easy. As for the talkers, I have fun talking with them.

I watched both of your films, and they were both enjoyable, but are any of your films, or any of my films worthy of getting you or me a job somewhere?

Thanks. But, that's not why I make films. I make films because I LOOOOOOOOVE to make them, regardless of where they take me. I've been making films for 34 years. I love watching and showing movies, as well. I'm the guy who comes to your party with a projector (I'm not kidding).

As for jobs, this week I was offered two gigs; both having to do with documenting people doing their craft. You know - boring, freelance video shit.

I have worked on productions, as a sound recordist, composer, PA, boom operator, camera operator. In the early 90's I made great money as an Accident Recreation photographer - we worked for law firms, representing big companies that were getting sued. We recreated accidents with dummies and did extensive documentation of accident scenes. But I tell you, I don't really care about that stuff. What I care about is writing, directing, editing, composing, which is why I work to support doing my own thing.

When I do a "cog" job, I tend to dislike filmmaking. Example: I used to score commercials and industrial videos. I gravitate towards movie music, so the client usually said my first version was "too dark," so I would do it again and all of them wanted that pop, uppity, good feel elevator music. Composing and filmmaking are so special to my heart, that it kills me that working for the wrong people makes me hate doing it. Yes, I've done related jobs, but not dream jobs.

I made my choice in life, which was to take a day job and work my dreams on the side. I made 4 features and they all got distributed. That's my sideline, as I use my regular job to maintain insurance and stability for my wife and 3 kids.

I have a horror feature in the pipeline, but I don't know when I'll start it. Each time I make a feature, I hope that this one is a jackpot that affords me to make my own films, full time. I know why I've had marginal success, up to this point. I have to grow, compete and be better than what's out there. Good actors, good story, plus being technically competent - that's obvious, but not easy to pull off on no budget. No one is just going to give me a job, directing PROMETHEUS 2. (Please, please, please!!!) I have to line up my own job.

Do we want to perfect our craft, or do we just want to be "creative" and produce the same sh*t everybody else is producing?

I'm trying to perfect the craft of making a no budget feature look like something done on a budget. I feel I've come close and just have to close a few gaps. It's possible, because people have done it (RED COCKROACHES, ABSENTIA). When I do that, I want to do it again a few times, then I can die happy. And, just for some greater satisfaction, maybe one or two of those becomes a cultural phenomenon.

 

[trueindie]

Hey Scoopicman,
Yes we do go back a while and I apologize for sounding so confrontational. I mean that, and I hope you accept my apology.

I really am not competitive. I remember my soccer playing days, when I would pass the ball to another player even if I was in front of an open goal post. It made me happier to see the other player rejoice at scoring, than if I had scored myself. I become competitive at a team level, not at an individual level. I'm some sort of congenital communist I think. It's weird. Enjoying the game, gives me more pleasure than winning. I really like to enjoy the moment I'm in.

Thanks for discussing your background. I appreciate it. My experience seems to be less than the dirt on your fingernails

I was really just having an intellectual argument, that's all. What you're doing is kind of what I'm doing. I've made one feature, and I've made a bunch of shorts (around 10). Never distributed anything. But all I'm trying to do is use my limited resources to get better. I just didn't think 48hfp is for me.

I thought that just because I held the position I did on 48hfp, you were calling me names. Putting me down, you know. . I felt like defending myself a bit.

In the grand scheme of things though, you probably win the argument. Filmmakers never agree with anything I say. With so many disagreements I have, it seems with all filmmakers, chances are high that I'm the one who's wrong . And it wouldn't be the first time.

Cheers,
Aveek
ps. If I'm ever in the Cleveland area, I'll make sure to invite myself to your film community.

 

[Scoopicman]

Hey Scoopicman,
Yes we do go back a while and I apologize for sounding so confrontational. I mean that, and I hope you accept my apology.

No apology needed, Aveek. My first post was pretty passionate and was counterpointing Sonnyboo's position. I have no problem with people who don't compete, but rather I didn't like the criticism of it. I stand with all filmmakers, whether they try festivals or not. Bottom line: Anything that inspires us to make movies is a good thing, whether it be for personal gratification, a job or a stupid contest. Moviemaking is cool.

I often disagree with Sonnyboo, but we rarely argue. I consider him a long friend and someone who has a lot of experience. We are not divided.

I really am not competitive. I remember my soccer playing days, when I would pass the ball to another player even if I was in front of an open goal post. It made me happier to see the other player rejoice at scoring, than if I had scored myself.

That's how I felt about my wife getting some recognition for her acting. She scored our goal, without any ambition of "scoring." She was just trying to help out her husband. She always says, "you and your film people." I keep saying, "Well, they think your one of us, too." She smiles and gets a kick out of being in these flicks.

I'm actually a bit shy when it comes to asking others for free help, so there are quite a few shorts where it's mostly my wife and kids helping. We make them for fun, but a huge part of the fun is showing them to get laughs or reactions.

Enjoying the game, gives me more pleasure than winning. I really like to enjoy the moment I'm in.

This may sound odd, after what I've posted. I don't care much for Academy Award or Golden Globe winners. I like the movies that I watch and, like you, I enjoy the moment (and the after moment, with the soundtrack - I'm listening to Bear McCreary's excellent EUROPA REPORT score, as I type this).

I really like watching movies. A decade ago, you would see one or two decent indie movies, out of 10, but I'm witnessing evolution. I have really enjoyed the fests that I've watched in the last few years. I see over all quality going up, as the video filmmaker culture becomes more cinema savvy. I recently attended the Vegas Indies Fest. A non-professional gathering. It wasn't competitive, but rather a sampling of the community filmmakers. I didn't see one dud in the bunch! The fest was 10 hours! That's a lot of indie fare that I really enjoyed watching.

What you're doing is kind of what I'm doing. I've made one feature, and I've made a bunch of shorts (around 10). Never distributed anything. But all I'm trying to do is use my limited resources to get better.

Yes. A big part of what we share, is that we are in this for the long haul.

I thought that just because I held the position I did on 48hfp, you were calling me names. Putting me down, you know. . I felt like defending myself a bit.

Not at all. Again, I'm sorry if my tone was a bit brash.

ps. If I'm ever in the Cleveland area, I'll make sure to invite myself to your film community.

I don't live there; I'm in Las Vegas. I helped judge one of the Cleveland fests, via internet. My best friend is from Cleveland and I seem to know a low of people from there. I've met Sonnyboo a few times, in Las Vegas and Wisconsin. Cleveland is a "happening place" for filmmaking!

But, yes - do invite yourself, if you are ever in the area! I guess I should throw out that the wife and I are hosting the 10th annual IndieMeet, June 6th-8th.


IndieMeet
IndieMeet 2011-12
IndieMeet 2013

 

[trueindie]

Cheers,
Aveek