What makes a winning film?

Wild Imagination Films

Wild Imagination Films

Well-known member
So curiosity begs the question... What makes a winning film?

Perhaps someone can put this as a graph or poll or something. I am bewildered as to what people are looking for in the films. Is acting more important than shot composition? Is story more important than execution? I wonder how my own opinions could be so vastly different than everyone elses.
 
Come on man.... All of the above. What are you really looking for here? Huh?
Seriously. All the things you listed wouldnt be listed if they didn't play an important role in the success of a great film.
 
A huge part of my judging of a film is how close the filmmaker got to conveying the story they set out to tell. Is the theme of their film totally lost under bad storytelling and technical downfalls? I don't require that a film be story perfect or techically perfect; I'm just hoping to see a film where it's the vision for the film came through to the end project.
A lot of movies here show a very clear vision for what the story is. Others have loose story points that drag or distract from the overall meaning while others have production quality issues that overshadow the movie's strengths. Or maybe a film succeeds perfectly in capturing the original vision of the story but the story just plain wasn't that good to begin with.

This is a lot of rambling, but in my judging I'm focusing not so much on the technical side but most on the intent of the film and how close the filmmakers were to accomplishing that vision. Fortunately there are a lot of films here with quite unique and well executed stories so it makes it a challenge to pick just one that I like the most. Good job, everybody.
 
I also have my own personality traits that shape their way into my decision making. As a filmmaker I don't want to become known for a certain style of film. I like my creative ambitions to be unpredictable and I don't want to be cast into a "type"; I think I express that best by wanting to make films that are different, so I am drawn to films that are different from what I'm used to seeing. Telling a story in an uncommon setting, taking a different approach to familiar subject matter, taking a common story and rebelling against its most common elements. If you read in my film thread you'll see that I based "The Artist" off a rebellion of cliche student film stories.



I'm putting an emphasis on successful execution of story rather than technical quality in my judgment because of what I wish I'd see in Hollywood more. I want to see films that are rooted in story. I think that talent in technical ability is something that a lot of people have or are capable of attaining but few are able to take those skills so they can emphasize and enunciate the stories they want to tell. Anyone can harness the ability to illuminate a person with three-point lighting setup but few can use their talent and skill to light this person in a way so that it enhances our understanding of who they are, as can be said about sound design, composition, direction, set design, and all aspects of the craft. Fewer people still can write a story that will allow for all of these technical talents to be drawn together and pronounced in a way that really forms something that is clearly directed and meaningful to be told; in short, many people are talented but few can communicate art.
In my vote and decision process for this contest I am trying to find a film that tells its story in the best way possible because those are the kinds of films that I want to see in the mainstream. What's great is that many of the films here have amazing production quality but when I'm not watching films that have money to throw away I view it as more of a bonus than a priority.
 
The films ability to sweep me up and take me into their special world is what I look for. A film can have all of the technical categories aced but without the magic ingredient I can leave it.

I'd say that starts with Acting, then Audio, then Story .... People always cry 'Story ? But story is the most important !'

To a degree; there are hundrdeds of "Okay" films out there that meet the acting and audio guidelines that we still like.

all of these ingredients are closely interwoven and a huge part of the tapestry of film.

-

Seem's a lot of people get caught up in 'How good the camera looks' and settle for that as Best Picture reasoning .... the quality of the picture is one of the last ingredients I need even though the art of the cinematographer is approximately as close together as the next categories.
 
John_Hudson said:
The films ability to sweep me up and take me into their special world is what I look for. A film can have all of the technical categories aced but without the magic ingredient I can leave it.

I'd say that starts with Acting, then Audio, then Story .... People always cry 'Story ? But story is the most important !'

To a degree; there are hundrdeds of "Okay" films out there that meet the acting and audio guidelines that we still like.

all of these ingredients are closely interwoven and a huge part of the tapestry of film.

-

Seem's a lot of people get caught up in 'How good the camera looks' and settle for that as Best Picture reasoning .... the quality of the picture is one of the last ingredients I need even though the art of the cinematographer is approximately as close together as the next categories.
Click to expand...

yup.
 
John_Hudson said:
The films ability to sweep me up and take me into their special world is what I look for. A film can have all of the technical categories aced but without the magic ingredient I can leave it.

I'd say that starts with Acting, then Audio, then Story .... People always cry 'Story ? But story is the most important !'

To a degree; there are hundrdeds of "Okay" films out there that meet the acting and audio guidelines that we still like.

all of these ingredients are closely interwoven and a huge part of the tapestry of film.

-

Seem's a lot of people get caught up in 'How good the camera looks' and settle for that as Best Picture reasoning .... the quality of the picture is one of the last ingredients I need even though the art of the cinematographer is approximately as close together as the next categories.
Click to expand...

Ahh, the reason I like the new voting system(although a top ten voting system i might like better)...anyway, last fest the voting sheet was all technical and to me some technically well done films did not have that take me away feeling to it. I wasn't drawn in.

Example for me this fest was AJAR technically there where better films but this had a WTF(Wow Tons of Fun) factor and pulled me in. so thats a good movie....there are lots of other examples of what a good movie is, and I think john summed it up nicely.
 
Wild Imagination Films said:
So curiosity begs the question... What makes a winning film?

Perhaps someone can put this as a graph or poll or something. I am bewildered as to what people are looking for in the films. Is acting more important than shot composition? Is story more important than execution? I wonder how my own opinions could be so vastly different than everyone elses.
Click to expand...

Great question.

I’ve asked myself this same question as I reviewed all of the movies in this fest and tried to come up with a vote for ‘my favorite’. And I assume that your question is referencing a ‘winning film’ in this fest?

First of all, I don’t believe that it can be purely objective. A great example is in the last fest. There were score sheets for different categories that were scored with a scale of 1 to 10. But, then after the members scored each film category and totaled, the score didn’t add up to what was their favorite film. So, the category scores were ‘massaged’ to put the film that they ‘liked’ above others.

And, as Hudson mentioned, there are a lot of ingredients that go into the creation of the ‘winning film’. For me, if they aren’t good ingredients, and I get taken out of the movie, then I won’t like it. And I think those ingredients can be ‘weighted’. For example, no matter how good the cinematography is, or the sound score, or the editing, if the acting is not good, it affects the whole viewing experience. That’s why in another post I suggested having award categories for Best Picture, Best Cinematography, Best Screenplay, Best Director, Best Score, etc. Some of those categories can be more objective. Best Picture (it’s kind of what we’re voting on in Dramafest) is more subjective. The 'secret' ingredient is more subjective.

I also agree with FatBird19 when he suggested that “A huge part of my judging of a film is how close the filmmaker got to conveying the story they set out to tell. Is the theme of their film totally lost under bad storytelling and technical downfalls? That’s how I applied my voting this time. I had “The Artist” (A feel good movie with a happy ending) and “UKP” (A movie that went against my sensibilities and had two characters that I didn’t like) in my top 5. Both movies were distinctly different, but I felt that the filmmakers conveyed the story that they set out to tell very well.

I watch and view the DVXUser Fest films differently than I do the films that I like to watch because the members creating and voting on these films have put in a tremendous effort to create what they believe to be a great short film. I might not like the story, or the characters, but I try to see if they conveyed the story they were trying to tell.

I think that, just as we all like different kinds of music and movies, that we have a ‘bias’ towards the ‘kind’ of film that we think is better.

I also think that a 'popular' film for a DVXUser Fest is influenced by the ‘hype’ (i.e. marketing) and to a degree, the ‘brotherhood’ (i.e. politics) of this forum. How often do you agree with the Academy Award nominations and winners? Again, that’s why I like the idea of awards for categories, because most of the categories are more objective. Don’t get me wrong with what I’m saying. I believe that the ‘winners’ will truly be the better films based on the general consensus of the members of this forum.

Everyone that entered is a winner because they took the time and energy to create their movie. They win because they learn, grow stronger with constructive criticism, and go through the ‘process’.

The reward is in the journey.
 
Great topic!

When I sit down to watch a film, I am much like Hudson, in the sense that I want to be transported to another world, the world where that film takes place. I want to be able to believe the characters and setting of the story. I think acting is the biggest area which can take me OUT of that world. If the acting isn't believable I can't believe the rest of the world. Also, I want to be entertained and moved. I want the film to make me respond in some way emotionally, so if those things happen, I enjoy the film.
 
I was tempted to vote for the one with the best actor & best score, but ultimately the story didn't make me "feel" something. It truly felt like a snippet from a bigger/"real" movie, but then again, that may be part of the problem. Excellent actor though, the most believable in the fest. And the score was great, it wasn't a plodding heavy-handed overdone taking-itself-too-seriously score, like many entries had. It was different, fresh, and really "fit." Definitely one of the "top" entries, but not quite "the top", even though it had the best actor and best score.

I was tempted to vote for the one with the best vintage feel and one of the best actors, but didn't think it was a "complete journey."

I was sorely tempted to vote for the one that transcends all others in scope, the one that looks and feels like a Hollywood blockbuster. But it had a few flaws that pulled me out of it. Its grandiosity nearly overcame them though, and this was a serious contender for the top vote.

I was never even slightly tempted to vote for the one with the far and away best cinematography.

I was highly tempted to vote for the one with the best actress and an overall complete "package" (acting/story/sound/cinematography etc), but it had a few flaws that kept it from the top prize. It was a very well-rounded film, but not necessarily as creative as some of the others.

I really, really wanted to vote for the one with no dialogue, a great soundtrack and the twist at the end. I didn't because overall I felt that it was just a "twist", not necessarily a complete film journey. But it came extremely close to getting the top vote because it made me actually FEEL something.

I very nearly voted for the one with okay cinematography, okay acting (except by the kid which was excellent), and complete plot. This was probably my second-place choice but it still felt like it wanted to be a feature masquerading as a short. Not much in the way of outright creativity, just a regular plot kind of thing, like the "best actress" one. Very similar in fact, and had it not been for the next film down, this very well might have gotten my vote.

So in the end...

... I went with one that had mediocre cinematography, mediocre acting, etc. But it captured the elements that mattered. It made me care about the lead character and about what he wanted. And more than anything, it embraced the art of short film AS a short film. It didn't try to be anything other than what it was. It wasn't a trimmed-down epic feature, or an extraction from a feature. It wasn't a nothing-happens-until-the-twist-or-joke-at-the-end. It was a journey, it was a story, it was complete, and it made me care about the character and made me happy that he "got" what he wanted. And it was highly creative.

So ultimately -- for me, caring about the character, understanding what he wants and seeing what he struggles with, and seeing how he overcomes it... that's what mattered. That beat out cinematography, acting, score, and all other technical arts. The fact that it was handled in a bizarre and creative manner was icing on the cake, and enough for it to get the vote.
 
its sad, but in some places if you have :

1. the main character discover he's gay
2. a surprise at the end
3. a scene with someone crying

then you have a great chance of winning
 
NathanPresley said:
its sad, but in some places if you have :

1. the main character discover he's gay
2. a surprise at the end
3. a scene with someone crying

then you have a great chance of winning
Click to expand...
where are these places? the only one i can think of is the "M. Night Shyamalan Gay & Lesbian International Ball-Your-Eyes-Out Film Festival". and that, sadly, only exists in my mind.
 
Zak Forsman said:
where are these places? the only one i can think of is the "M. Night Shyamalan Gay & Lesbian International Ball-Your-Eyes-Out Film Festival". and that, sadly, only exists in my mind.
Click to expand...

lol!
 
Dont get me wrong. Its very stupid, but for some reason judges seem to
eat up that crap. movies thay involve relating to gay people. Like BrokeBack Mountain
and others.
 
I am much like John Hudson and Brandon Rice in the fact that a film has to take me away. Where ever that place may be, I have to forget I am watching a movie and just enjoy the ride.

Like Barry G. a film has to make me feel something. It can be fun, it can be sad, it can even piss me off, but if I leave a film and all i can say is, "Blah." I wont even remember the name.

After the I watched all of the shorts for the first time I had two that stuck in my brain. One made me feel good and the other made me feel uneasy. The thing that really set them apart was the fact that they just drew me in and I watched. They captivated my attention and for six minutes each of them had me. I was in the story.

Because this is a contest for a prize I felt I had to be as fair as I could. I watched all of the films again and again. I watched the ones that were so very "Blah" to me just to make sure there wasn't anything I missed. A lot of them came close but for one reason or another something would happen that would take me out of the story. A forced line, a bad special effect, wondering which direction the car was going to hit the guy from. But still there were the two. I watched them both so many times. At that point I had to weigh all the elements. Story, acting, sound, cinematography. It came down to the last element. Punch for punch they were both the same until that last element. I almost flipped a coin and left it to chance. How do you choose one of two different stories as the winner. Film making is after all a technical art too, so I am afraid the one that looked better took the prize.

In the end I looked for the short that captivated me the most and had the right mix of technical ability. One of the hardest decisions I have ever made.
 
NathanPresley said:
Dont get me wrong. Its very stupid, but for some reason judges seem to
eat up that crap. movies thay involve relating to gay people. Like BrokeBack Mountain
and others.
Click to expand...
err, what are the "and others"? Not even Top Gun never won no Oscars!! maybe it was ahead of its time.

seriously, what gay-themed films are getting undue praise?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top