Short film festival contests-worth the trouble?

[ATP]

I have recently entered my first short film contest, serving as production manager, “script manager/consultant”, and possibly both AD & editing assistant.

The contestants have around 30 days to complete their film, from script to screen. This film has been written by an actor, and while the subject matter does not interest me personally, it interests me in other capacities.

I have observed a number of problems with the process, which appear to arise repeatedly. These are:

i) poor quality scripts and;

ii) in small communities, problems related to ‘staffing’-other fellow filmmakers who are unable to assist as they are also contestants busy doing their own film(s), and obtaining crew.

I have grave doubts about turning in work that is mediocre, given that insufficient time has been spent on the script. Let alone having to contend with ‘staffing’ problems which seem a perennial issue, and not just confined to the matter of a contest and the time frame.

Whether it is a contest of 48 hours or 30 days, what is the point? Is it the prize, which seems in a lot of cases, not a lot of money? I really fail to see how ‘speed’ helps to hone the craft, given that the script is the foundation upon which the film is made--insufficient time spent on script development certainly doesn’t help.

I think that the actor/filmmaker would be better off spending time entering, and working for, "long duration" screen writing competitions, if honing his craft is the idea. THEN go and make the short film & enter it in competitions (or short film festivals).

 

[robertamarie]

short film festival contests - worth the trouble

ATP
I understand where you're coming from. It's rampant and unfortunately many filmmakers don't understand the 'business' of filmmaking (fresh scripts, not settling in casting, etc.)
Please check out my website www.HowNotToMakeAShortFilm.com
I am the author of How Not To Make A Short Film: Secrets From A Sundance Programmer
If the writers/filmmakers cannot afford consulting (though it's super affordable) then at least make them watch a bunch of *successful* short films - they're everywhere!
Best
Roberta Munroe

 

[Blade_Jones]

Don't throw your money away to Sun Dance, Cannes, Toronto, etc. The only festivals worth spending money to enter are medium sized festivals in big cities like NY and LA (Malibu Film Fest, San Fernando Valley Film fest, Long Island Film Fest, maybe CineVegas). Rinky dink festivals in no name cities are a waste of money. Even the rinky dink festivals in big cities are a waste because distributors don't give a rats ass if you win one of those.

 

[ATP]

Yes, sorry to say, but my OP was not addressing the question of _which_ festival to enter? My question or concerns were more germane to _process_ as applied to development and completion of most any short film for a short film contest (or festival)

I think the others here also were of the same mind.

 

[M1chae1]

I think festivals and challenges are a good way to: a) practice your craft, b) find quality talent and crew, c) see what other filmmakers in the area can do, d) feel good about a project you finished.

Personally, I'm much more about shooting a quality feature for as little money as possible, shooting it to festivals, and then either self distributing or finding a distributor. Rinse and repeat.

I think far too many filmmakers focus on shorts or pilots. In most of these cases, the films don't go anywhere, nor do they get picked up for expansion.

I say in 'most cases'...to be sure, there are some people that receive awards in noted festivals, and receive investment for a feature or future project. But these cases are rare.

I think filmmakers are much more likely to find interest and attention by shooting quality features, marketing them properly, and getting them distributed. If you keep this up year after year...and you have a good product...you will garner much more attention.

Getting 'clover leafs' just because you were an 'official selection' to me means nothing. Nor does winning 'best film' in Podunk, Tennessee International Film Fest. Let's be honest...many of the smaller unknown festivals allow anything in...they just want to fill up their slots. And a lot of these films are very poor.

As far as Cannes and Sundance...well...what I've noticed is the majority of the 'Official Selections' for these festivals are on an entirely different budgetary level than what most of us work with. Isn't that true? Not to get into the 'what's independent mean' conversation again...but a million dollar picture isn't what I consider 'independent'. Yes yes I know what the term actually means...but it's the concept and breed...not the big name company tied to it.

Anyway.

Festivals are great to have fun, find talent, and practice your craft. But most of the short filmmakers I know are either living in a dream world, or scared to make a feature. The filmmakers that are making a name for themselves are shooting features and following through.

Cheers.

 

[Uranium City]

Amen, M1chae1!!!!!

 

[ATP]

But most of the short filmmakers I know are either living in a dream world, or scared to make a feature.

Hmmm...why would they be scared to make a feature??

 

[M1chae1]

Hmmm...why would they be scared to make a feature??

One reason would be their conception of how much it costs to shoot a feature. This can scare the bejeezus out of people. So many film makers are throwing around budget numbers they think will raise their film up to a level which garners recognition. The truth is, it's not about the money on the indie level...it's about the quality, the concept, the passion, the marketing, and the timing. First time directors of features think they have to have 30, 40 or 50K to make a feature worth watching...something that will give them a name or allow them to receive future funding. That's not true. An example is the last feature I worked on (NUN OF THAT) which has an entire budget of 8K. We are currently on our 12th theatrical screening (all of which made a profit) and have three separate distributors making offers.

And honestly, for the most part, features ARE more expensive to shoot. We're all kinda scared of being poor, or potentially 'wasting' money on a dead end project.

Another reason is that it's much easier to write, shoot, and edit a short. Much less time and money goes into a short. Not to mention expectations aren't as high. If you shoot a short, you don't realllllllly have to do anything with it. You can chalk it off to a learning experience...you can call it a 'pilot' and when no one bites to fund the feature...you can move on to the next concept. When you decide to shoot a feature, there is much much more involved...a lot more responsibility...a lot more people expecting you to 'sell' your movie. Putting a feature on the shelf and letting it collect dust is much less forgivable then with a short or pilot. You have to follow through with a feature....or at least you're expected to. A lot more responsibility and a lot more expectation. It's tough.

Anyway. This is just my two cents. Thanks for listening.

 

[Comix]

I was in a group that entered a 48 hour challenge and the experience of being able to get everything done in a short amount of time was not only fulfilling, but we all learned a lot. We ended up getting second and the prize was a part of the reason for doing it, but also like a few members have said, getting it done and having a reason to do it and get people involved.