your opinion of slamdance?

ugafan

ugafan

Looking for a woman
What is your opinion of Slamdance? Is it a great accomplishment to get accepted into this festival or is it just something for those that weren't good enough for Sundance?
 
Slamdance is a good festival but it's not going to be the great big deal that many people think. Outside of Jared Hess with Peluca, and the fact the Christopher Nolan went there (along with a great many other festivals worldwide) I dont think the deals happen nearly as often as at Sundance. In fact Sundance probably will get you a better chance at a deal than Slamdance
and Toronto combined.
 
We submitted our last doc. to Slamdance... no acceptance :( I think its a pretty cool fest from what I know.
 
Brandon Rice said:
We submitted our last doc. to Slamdance... no acceptance :( I think its a pretty cool fest from what I know.
Click to expand...

Well, if you got money you can have a good time there in Park City. I dont have the money so I might be sleeping in my car...not a very good time then.
 
Dont feel bad about not getting acceptance...they rejected Christopher Nolan the first time he applied. They admit it's the biggest blunder in Slamdance history.
 
Last edited:
be psyched if you get into SLAM DANCE

For those that don't know Slam Dance is an alternative festival that goes on during Sundance in Park Cities Utah (along with Troma Dance, lol).

when I worked at Sundance in 98 I think SLAM DANCE was in its 1st year and it was somewhat lame.

After the top 10 US festivals its one of the best with the added caveat that all of the industry people and distributors are in town for Sundance are also around to some degree for SLAM DANCE.

As it does with many other festivals in the U.S. Sundance often recommends films they think highly off but can't fit in their programming that year to Slam Dance. Your film may be at Slam Dance BECAUSE Sundance liked it, ironically, but just couldn't fit it with their other programming.

SLAM dance has an increasing reputation, the parties rival Sundance, distributors well see films there that garner buzz, and you get to go to Sundance while you are there.

2 more things to consider
1) the Broken guys went to Sundance with no film in the festival and passed of a DVD to Roger Ebert in line for a screening and he gave them a review which made them.
2) a college friend of mine was just in a picture that got distribution at SLAM Dance.
3) Slam Dance has begun to effect Sundance as they have modified their programming based on the success of SLAM Dance ... it's no longer seen as a poorman's Sundance but a more alternative, even more indie, edgier festival that goes on in conjunction with Sundance.

The Edinburgh Fringe Festival (world's largest theatre festival) was born in the shadow of the Edinburgh Theatre Festival. Now the Fringe Festival eclipses the 6 or 8 Show Theatre festival with people form all over the world coming to see 1,700 performances of plays over 22 days (or such was the case when I went in 97)

So because its the Fringe Festival, don't let that get you down. It's just different and may in fact be a better place to showcase your particular movie.

Sources.
Personal Experience and
Chris Gore's Ultimate Film Festival Survival Guide
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1580650570/002-5458741-5334413?v=glance&n=283155
 
I entered my script Prodigal Son for two reads both rushed. Cost me like 175. The first critique came back and the guy loved it, but said I needed to cut off the first part of the third act and beef up a couple of characters. I did that and resubmitted it. I emailed John Stoddard asking him if I should have my original reader read it again or somebody new? He said somebody new but asked me to send him another hard copy on line because they can't find it and they'd have to sift through thousands to find mine. This told me it was on the shhhhhiit heap. Then I waited a full month, even though I paid for a rush on the second read before I got my response. The second guy told me it was a piece of **** whiched confused me but then I read that he suggested the genre as Drama. I'm not delusional and my movie was a comedy. If he didn't see that, then he didn't read it. So now I've got two warring opinions and I don't know whether to set the thing on fire, or continue grinding away at it. (It's two years in the making) I sent the second critique to four people and the first thing they all said was that he didn't read it. There were too many "tells" in his critique showing that he didnt' know what he was talking about. What kind of credentials do you need to judge one of those things anyway?
 
Luke, any sort of critique is subjective, credentials or not. The only thing that can be objectively evaluated is whether you follow professional script format, which I am guessing you did. The key to all of this sort of thing, from what I have read, is matching up your type of film with a distributor who specializes in your market. From watching different companies, I notice that they all have a "brand" to them. You need to find your niche in the market and exploit it.
 
Luke, I've had two teleplays in the slamdance finals, met John, met the readers, met the fox people a bunch of times. They are all really good, honest, hardworking people... but they definetely do have a particular vibe they are hunting for. They're seeking for the next "new" think. So they have a perspective, and simply understand that sometimes your stuff just doesn't fit their mold.

Submitting to a festival is the equivalent of playing blackjack! Just have fun, but don't get frustrated when the house takes yah!
 
zoostory said:
...Submitting to a festival is the equivalent of playing blackjack! Just have fun, but don't get frustrated when the house takes yah!
Click to expand...
Good advice ... the quality of your screenplay or film is a factor, but not the only factor by any stretch.
 
I hear you. It's just when you get two critique's that are on exact opposite ends of the spectrum, it can be confusing.
 
Two opposite critiques should be enlightening. That is proof that in the end, it is only peoples opinions. And if the critiques are extreme in either direction, than you know you have made something provocative that gets people emotional. And that is always good. I have taken a lot of critique in my life, and while it's always hard up front to swallow it, when you simmer down, you begin to see between the lines and understand what all that jazz really means to you.
 
Nice Zoostory but I swear the second guy was reading it during rush hour traffic with a crying baby in the back seat. He suggested the genre as Drama when it was clearly comedy. In my bones I don't think he read it.
 
Luke, again... rather than being frustrated and questioning the fact of whether the reader gave a good read, or even read it at all, use this as a valuable peice of information for the future. Since he got the genre wrong, you can deduct a few things: 1) he didn't read it at all (maybe the first and last 10 pages). 2) he was busy and didn't give it much attention, though he did read it fully 3) he is an idiot 4) you need to clarify your genre because he and others like him exist.

By #4 I mean, perhaps it is best to go "Title of script" then subtitle "a comedy by..."
That is something you have learned from this guy. Not because you're not a good writer, but because now you have learned another trick to combat the field of readers. Know your enemy. Plan your attacks. If they fail, regroup, strategize, attack again. Be a diplomat but always gain knowledge. Anything to get an edge.

This guy helped you realize even more so that these contests are, en large, gambles. Now... you really want to play a smart game, ask John to be on the Slamdance events list. He'll tell you about all sorts of meets around town in LA. I ended up drinking beers with a reader at the Cat and Fidle. I knew instantly that if he read any of my stuff, I'de be dead! A year later, at another event, he recognized me. I deduced that he read my teleplay, and lo and behold, I knew instantly that, while a semi-finalist, I would not be in the top three.

Also, at the event where they announced the top 3 (yes, they actually invited all the semi-finalists out to get them all pissed off at not winning, save for 3) they said they had free tote bags for each member of the final 3 teams. I counted 3 tote bags, and since 50% of us had writing partners, we knew we were out, or there would be more tote bags. It was quite hilarious, actually... but, the fox people WERE there... and they were really, really cool... and I ended up pitching two projects to them months later... so you never know... but you can always drink their free beer.

And heck, you know, slamdance is THE only festival right now doing an original Teleplay contest. I know first hand that they're not making mad money off of it, in fact, their entry fees are way reasonable compared to others... so they are doing this because they really believe in finding new talent. John Stoddard works his ass off to help people... so at least they are trying to promote new talent... even though, no matter what, it is still a lottery.

Does this make any sense? I am in a rambly mood!
 
zoostory said:
... 3) he is an idiot 4) you need to clarify your genre because he and others like him exist...
Click to expand...
totally ... in screenplays you get to commit what would be a cardinal sin in a stage play ... you can actually TELL the reader what to think or give them inside info not in the text.

The introduction of Rupert Everet's character in my Best Friend's wedding contains the following, age, appearance, "He's gay but you'd never guess it ..." followed by another detail or two and buttoned with "Or maybe you would."

So the writer just told us he's gay -- not gonna get into the "the viewer must be able to see it for you to include it but you can get in a few novelistic details if they are few, succinct, and well written" thing, though I suppose an actor could use that information and do one thing that seemed fey and one thing that seemed butch in his first few moments on screen ...

But the point is that while dumbing down your movie may (or may not) be a bad thing, dumbing down your screenplay is almost always a good thing. Without changing the story, the characters, or what would wind up on screen if your script was shot with the most faithful unaltered interpretation in Hollywood history, you can hold the readers hand and SPELL IT OUT FOR THEM a lot.

Because, the people that are reading your script read gazillions of them every day, and if there is one thing you can count on it's skimming, flipping through, and not reading the whole thing. So in the example above, rather than letting the reader figure out that Rupert Everet's character was gay like an audience member would, the writer just lays it out there in the character description with how tall he is and his age, etc. "GAY CHARACTER" in blinking Neon. THis maybe information that the audience would get very soon through a subtle or not so subtle performance, but it makes this characteristic abundantly clear to the reader so that the following scenes are colored appropriately.

So pepper your Screen Directions / Action lines, etc. with a trail of bread crumbs that will make sure a skimming idiot "gets it".

And a sub title (A comedy of errors ... a misguided comedy ... a comedy for the dwarf in us all) is not a bad idea --- especially if your humor is subtle, or quirky like Napoleon Dynamite or subtle/quirky like Wes Anderson or David O'Russell.

I guess I am in a rambly mood too ... wait ... I'm always like that.
 
oh, and one last thing... readers I have talked to HATE too much description in the first 3 pages. But, of course, that is where you are setting the most up... so go figure. What I have deduced is that they hate large paragraphs. You look at a large paragraph of novelistic form that paints a detailed picture and you get bored. You need short sentences that are actions or very breif, succinct descriptions. I'm not trying to force a style on anyone, but unless you're already a made guy like Tarantino, rambling ain't gonna help get you through most doors (I say most cause you never know).

Each page needs to "look" sparse and easily readable. Welcome to the grift.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top