Darn you Sundance
- Thread starter claxius
- Start date
filmmaker58
Well-known member
I'm a bit baised against sundance also (this is a sour grapes post). We entered my film Siren (www.sirenthemovie.com) last year (shot with the DVx100 BTW), and it wasn't selected. Our producer ended up going to Park City and finding a place to screen it anyway, and close to 2000 people saw it and many said it was the best film they saw at Sundance. But it was too commercial, and didn't have big enough names to make the cut. Most of those selected were foreign films that were mostly unwatchable as I heard it.
After that experience, I don't know what there selection criteria is, but it doesn't seem to have anything to do with taste.
After that experience, I don't know what there selection criteria is, but it doesn't seem to have anything to do with taste.
John Trent
Well-known member
What's the view here about Slamdance?
Justyn, thanks for the inside low down about Sundance. It sounds even worse than I thought and that's saying something.
Justyn, thanks for the inside low down about Sundance. It sounds even worse than I thought and that's saying something.
DVxuser is gonna have a presence in Park City this year... its about time we rolled in and showed them how its done.
Great thread, especially Justyn's realism.
I'm sure a lot of films don't quite measure up over the long term to some of the coverage, festival slots, or accolades they receive.
However, most people tend to overstate the demand for and marketability of their work. You can see it from American Idol to Project Greenlight. On Idol, so many horrible Gong-Show acts just look shocked to enraged when they're told they have no talent. I think it was PGL II where the girl with that horrible script about the trailer-trash family just couldn't believe she didn't win. She only got as far as she did because what she wrote was halfway coherent (unlike most of what was rejected).
The alternative to politics and bullsh*t is pure meritocracy, and most people would by no means be huge fans of that either if they ever encountered it.
I'm sure a lot of films don't quite measure up over the long term to some of the coverage, festival slots, or accolades they receive.
However, most people tend to overstate the demand for and marketability of their work. You can see it from American Idol to Project Greenlight. On Idol, so many horrible Gong-Show acts just look shocked to enraged when they're told they have no talent. I think it was PGL II where the girl with that horrible script about the trailer-trash family just couldn't believe she didn't win. She only got as far as she did because what she wrote was halfway coherent (unlike most of what was rejected).
The alternative to politics and bullsh*t is pure meritocracy, and most people would by no means be huge fans of that either if they ever encountered it.
Last edited:
Brian Petersen
Well-known member
We all know filmmakers that fall into that American Idol/Project Greenlight rejects list. And I'm sure a lot of us, myself included, have had those moments when we wonder, am I one of those people and just don't know it? I know someone who is just so positive and just keeps making shorts and his own no-budget features, and nothing has happened to any of them, and to be honest, they're not really that great. But what do you say? It reminds me of a quote that a film professor of mine had on his wall.
"No amount of sincerity can make up for lack of talent." - Sidney Lumet
Harsh, but with some truth.
That being said, Sundance isn't always the perfect judge of talent.
"No amount of sincerity can make up for lack of talent." - Sidney Lumet
Harsh, but with some truth.
That being said, Sundance isn't always the perfect judge of talent.
Ted Spencer
Veteran
Sounds like a director's variation on Oscar Wilde's "all bad poetry is sincere".
zoostory
Well-known member
Geez guys. Pick up Chris Gore's excellent Film Festival Survival handbook and do some research. The statistics are depressing, yes. But resentment, slander, opinions... they're not going to get you very far.
Fact is festivals are the prime mode of distribution (yes, distribution) for independent cinema today... maybe not tomorrow, but today. If you want an audience to see your work, and you want to generate interest, connections, and business, as an independent filmmaker, then you HAVE to apply to film festivals. Showing your family and neighbors your film at home on your plasma isn't going to sell it. Unless you live in Bel Air next door to the Coppolas
Now, if you do a short, your options are even more limited, as making a sale isn't the same as selling a feature. Way smaller market.
So, before you make a short (I know you HAVE to make a short, for the art, for the drive that is within you, oh filmmaker) look ahead to the future. What are you going to do with it? How are you going to market it? Sell it? Find festivals that fit your venue and target them. Go to them! Do research.
To sit here and bash this or that festival because you didn't get in, or know a friend of a friend who works for it, etc, means you're just sitting on the sidelines. Get up, get over it, move on.
I've made 3 short films (1 that went to a slew of festivals) , written 2 features (one produced and in digidance in 99) 4 TV shows (2 made it to the Slamdance Semifinals). When I first got into some festivals, 3 years ago, with my own short, I was excited. But then I realized that that is not the end. You get in, it screens, so what? The politics don't start there. You have to treat it like blackjack. If you just play, the dealer gets the advantage. If you learn to count the cards as best you can, you tip the scale in your direction.
I have another film that will be ready very soon. this is my last short. My goal is to generate interest in financing a feature, and getting better representation. With those goals in mind, I am prepared to enter the festival world again.
And for that person who asked about slamdance, having been there twice... I'll say its a fun event, with good timing... but the Sundance people ignore you, and you don't get much out of it unless you hustle real hard in park city. Some people claim to actually have a stigma against Slamdance, because they think of it as an elite bunch of dirty panced Sundance wannabees. Not my opinion, but just something to watch for. But hey, if you're in Park City screening your film in January, that seems pretty good to me!
Fact is festivals are the prime mode of distribution (yes, distribution) for independent cinema today... maybe not tomorrow, but today. If you want an audience to see your work, and you want to generate interest, connections, and business, as an independent filmmaker, then you HAVE to apply to film festivals. Showing your family and neighbors your film at home on your plasma isn't going to sell it. Unless you live in Bel Air next door to the Coppolas
Now, if you do a short, your options are even more limited, as making a sale isn't the same as selling a feature. Way smaller market.
So, before you make a short (I know you HAVE to make a short, for the art, for the drive that is within you, oh filmmaker) look ahead to the future. What are you going to do with it? How are you going to market it? Sell it? Find festivals that fit your venue and target them. Go to them! Do research.
To sit here and bash this or that festival because you didn't get in, or know a friend of a friend who works for it, etc, means you're just sitting on the sidelines. Get up, get over it, move on.
I've made 3 short films (1 that went to a slew of festivals) , written 2 features (one produced and in digidance in 99) 4 TV shows (2 made it to the Slamdance Semifinals). When I first got into some festivals, 3 years ago, with my own short, I was excited. But then I realized that that is not the end. You get in, it screens, so what? The politics don't start there. You have to treat it like blackjack. If you just play, the dealer gets the advantage. If you learn to count the cards as best you can, you tip the scale in your direction.
I have another film that will be ready very soon. this is my last short. My goal is to generate interest in financing a feature, and getting better representation. With those goals in mind, I am prepared to enter the festival world again.
And for that person who asked about slamdance, having been there twice... I'll say its a fun event, with good timing... but the Sundance people ignore you, and you don't get much out of it unless you hustle real hard in park city. Some people claim to actually have a stigma against Slamdance, because they think of it as an elite bunch of dirty panced Sundance wannabees. Not my opinion, but just something to watch for. But hey, if you're in Park City screening your film in January, that seems pretty good to me!
Painters just have to pay for paints and a canvas to make art. Writers only need paper and pencil (or a laptop, these days). Filmmakers have an unusual obstacle as artists in that they theoretically need a chunk of change to make their art. Features are expensive. The unfortunate fact that the artistic personality is not always synomymous with the entreprenurial personality is kind of funny, kind of sad when you think about it.
However, regarding an above post that said :
"I know someone who is just so positive and just keeps making shorts and his own no-budget features, and nothing has happened to any of them, and to be honest, they're not really that great. But what do you say?"
I'm sure we all know people like this, who seem to have little talent but infinite enthusiasm, and the ability to live in their own optimistic dreamworlds. But I have to ask the question, what would you rather be at the end of the day:
Someone who spent their life making shorts and features, expressing themselves and ultimately living a happy life?
Or someone who spent most of their life hustling, wheeling and dealing, and maybe never getting to make that feature they wanted to make, and ultimately living life as a cynical, bitter, burned-out person?
It seems to come down to philosophy: what do we do with our short time on this planet?
I'm not going to defend the work of talentless wannabes, but you gotta give them credit for actually doing the work and making movies. Sometimes showing a film to friends and family is all the audience you really need to be happy as a filmmaker--especially if your film only cost $100.
I find myself in between these two extremes. I'm neither the supertalented hotshot nor the clueless optimist. But I'm torn. Do I re-orient my whole life and try to get a "real" feature off the ground, knowing it could take years to pull off? Or do I continue to make affordable shorts that win awards in regional festivals?
Ultimately, I think what zoostory says is right: educate yourself. Get your film out to the right venues, and use those venues to network and get closer to your goals of making bigger, better films.
However, regarding an above post that said :
"I know someone who is just so positive and just keeps making shorts and his own no-budget features, and nothing has happened to any of them, and to be honest, they're not really that great. But what do you say?"
I'm sure we all know people like this, who seem to have little talent but infinite enthusiasm, and the ability to live in their own optimistic dreamworlds. But I have to ask the question, what would you rather be at the end of the day:
Someone who spent their life making shorts and features, expressing themselves and ultimately living a happy life?
Or someone who spent most of their life hustling, wheeling and dealing, and maybe never getting to make that feature they wanted to make, and ultimately living life as a cynical, bitter, burned-out person?
It seems to come down to philosophy: what do we do with our short time on this planet?
I'm not going to defend the work of talentless wannabes, but you gotta give them credit for actually doing the work and making movies. Sometimes showing a film to friends and family is all the audience you really need to be happy as a filmmaker--especially if your film only cost $100.
I find myself in between these two extremes. I'm neither the supertalented hotshot nor the clueless optimist. But I'm torn. Do I re-orient my whole life and try to get a "real" feature off the ground, knowing it could take years to pull off? Or do I continue to make affordable shorts that win awards in regional festivals?
Ultimately, I think what zoostory says is right: educate yourself. Get your film out to the right venues, and use those venues to network and get closer to your goals of making bigger, better films.
jeffyjones
Well-known member
Am I the only one who thinks the entire system, including everything from festivals to studios to distributors, is becoming obsolete? I'm sure most film students and those who adhere to the typical snobbery would disagree, but as a guy who has done mostly ENG style stuff, and makes a living on the Internet, I find it all laughable that there are these pretentious stiffs on festival boards thinking they're the key to getting good films seen.
Read the writing on the wall... Disney just cut hundreds of jobs and will make fewer movies next year to concentrate on the blockbusters. Record companies are losing sales while everyone is finding a niche on MySpace. News Corp. is freaked out that all of a sudden YouTube and Google Video are cutting into their space (which is probably why they bought MySpace). Let's face it, the Internet has been changing the way people consume content for years, and the theme is that people will have more choice to find and consume exactly what interests them. They're deciding for themselves instead of waiting for media companies to market something to them.
I'll make a film some day, I'm sure of that. I'll post it online, and if I'm lucky and it doesn't suck, people will like it. Maybe I'll even figure out a way to make a buck from it.
I don't know what the answer is, but there are other ways to be seen outside of the system.
Read the writing on the wall... Disney just cut hundreds of jobs and will make fewer movies next year to concentrate on the blockbusters. Record companies are losing sales while everyone is finding a niche on MySpace. News Corp. is freaked out that all of a sudden YouTube and Google Video are cutting into their space (which is probably why they bought MySpace). Let's face it, the Internet has been changing the way people consume content for years, and the theme is that people will have more choice to find and consume exactly what interests them. They're deciding for themselves instead of waiting for media companies to market something to them.
I'll make a film some day, I'm sure of that. I'll post it online, and if I'm lucky and it doesn't suck, people will like it. Maybe I'll even figure out a way to make a buck from it.
I don't know what the answer is, but there are other ways to be seen outside of the system.
smelni
Veteran
I got one other view on this - and its not pointed at anyone in particular so noone take it personal.
Ill tell it through a quick story - I come from an acting background - I was doint that thing where you pay to audition for an agent. After a number of times I was speaking to an agent outside of that environment and I expressed my frustration - I felt like i walked in and it didnt matter what I did - they looked, smiled and I walked out. THis agent I was talking to said - "Not to be rude. But maybe you werent good enough." After reeling from hearing that and thinking I realized that if I walked in and wowed the agent, they would want to use me. They would send me on auditions if they felt they could make money with me. they wouldnt ignore the possibility of making that money. SO I clearly wasnt wowing them in auditions. This is not to say I couldnt - but hte fact was, I wasnt.
SO to take this to filmmaking. If you make a film that a distro or studio thinks will make money - of course they will buy it. If a festival thinks it will get attention (the kind the festival wants) they will accept it. So if you arent getting accepted maybe its not good enough OR (and easier to stomach) you arent doing a good enogh job convincing people that it is as good as it is.
I little bit of a rant i know - but my 2 cents here.
Ill tell it through a quick story - I come from an acting background - I was doint that thing where you pay to audition for an agent. After a number of times I was speaking to an agent outside of that environment and I expressed my frustration - I felt like i walked in and it didnt matter what I did - they looked, smiled and I walked out. THis agent I was talking to said - "Not to be rude. But maybe you werent good enough." After reeling from hearing that and thinking I realized that if I walked in and wowed the agent, they would want to use me. They would send me on auditions if they felt they could make money with me. they wouldnt ignore the possibility of making that money. SO I clearly wasnt wowing them in auditions. This is not to say I couldnt - but hte fact was, I wasnt.
SO to take this to filmmaking. If you make a film that a distro or studio thinks will make money - of course they will buy it. If a festival thinks it will get attention (the kind the festival wants) they will accept it. So if you arent getting accepted maybe its not good enough OR (and easier to stomach) you arent doing a good enogh job convincing people that it is as good as it is.
I little bit of a rant i know - but my 2 cents here.
jeffyjones
Well-known member
But that's kind of what I'm driving at too... that "success" is measured by the establishment as wide release and broad appeal. Yeah, we'll all go run out and see the next Pirates movie with our families, sure, but how many of your favorite movies are really broadly accepted hits?
Even crap has its place (we call the toilet YouTube, right?
). If half the junk on network TV can make even a little money, surely a mediocre film can if it can reach the audience that thinks it's good enough.
Even crap has its place (we call the toilet YouTube, right?
). If half the junk on network TV can make even a little money, surely a mediocre film can if it can reach the audience that thinks it's good enough.Yes, crap has its place -- but not on the big screen. I agree that most people just aren't good enough to make films. Film is too important, too beautiful and too complex an art form to be left in hands of people who don't know what they're doing. I'm probably the lone voice in the desert by saying this, but there are way too many people making way too many movies - digital or otherwise.
Rob
Rob
dustino
Well-known member
RobMora said:
I disagree with this - kind of. If your point is that there is alot of crap out there that dilutes the entire "market" so that distributors (or even consumers if someone is distributing directly or through the internet) have to swim through a sea of it to find anything worthwhile - I would agree that that's true. I just don't see that as a bad thing. I still believe the cream rises to the top and good films with motivated filmmakers find their way onto screens or into people's homes. Besides, I think alot of people might make a few horrible films before they figure out what they're doing.
Think of it like painting - there was a time during the Renaissance when few people could afford to paint a fresco or oil painting. Most painters had a shop with numerous assistants within a hierarchy of apprenticeships. You just couldn't run out to the store and buy some tubes of paint and canvases. You had to purchase the raw materials and grind them down to make pigments. You had to purchase expensive oils or expensive plaster mixes to mix with the pigment. You had to build and stretch a canvas or, worse, find a patron's wall to complete your fresco. As a result, most paintings were pretty damn good because it was a true craft where experience was passed down. Now that that's not the case, are there fewer good painters? No way, there are TONS more excellent painters, but, yes, there are thousands and thousands of unskilled, untalented people that call themselves painters. I'm happy to be forced to look at so many horrible paintings knowing that the net increase of excellent painters has grown exponentially.
Yes, there's way more crap out there than ever before, but there is also way more opportunity for true talent to emerge in filmmaking.
dustino said:
Well said, dustino. I also believe this is exactly what is happening in the music world as well. Since the tools of the trade have become so incredibly good and cheap much more noise is being made but now there are also many talented artists who have an opportunity to be heard who would have otherwise gone silent.
--Gary
dustino said:
I hear what you're saying and it's fine, but I just don't have the time or patience to do that. That's what festivals, in part, are for: to separate the art from the trash. Let THEM do the dirty work, then show me the really good stuff. And yes, you're right, the cream will eventually rise to the top. The problem is all the the do-do floating next to it.
Rob
Flash Beaver
Well-known member
Give me lots of crap! Its a small price to pay...
Give me lots of crap! Its a small price to pay...
Rob, I see an angle you may be coming from but on the surface I totally disagree with you.
The big thing I see now compared to just ten years ago, are the number of barriers that have vanished between an idea and the finished product. I see this in print, photography and film & video too.
Yes we'll have to filter through some trash but I really don't want to go back to expensive proprietary hardware and systems, "Chief Editors" and other such self-inflating types treating me like a red headed stepchild when I am trying to further my quality and hopefully bring some good to the people.
If a lot of Joes and Janes trying to come up while making trash out there is the price I pay for a 24 Frame HD camera and a complete edit bay in a little white box all for less than a new VW – so be it! Give me a heap of it right now on my front door so then I can learn further what not to do and improve my work a little more the next time! And maybe we can give them a little help along the way too...
Back in the day, some of our people in our crews were like one legged cats trying to bury turds on a frozen pond. Still we worked through it, and after a few inside projects they began to get it. Before we knew we had people with a little talent and a lot of passion transcend from newsroom drones into beautiful editors in pre-read D2 heaven.
Yeah we had to mine coal to get diamonds. But when you have a bigger pile of coal, odds are you'll find even more diamonds.
I look forward to seeing some real crap on the big screen soon, especially if its some smelly crap and the screen is as big as IMAX and I get to pay $9.00 for it.
So then I may further appreciate really marvelous work as it glides across the screen and I walk away with a smile.
By the way, snotty film festivals certainly don't help filter the crap from the elite film artistes who "know what they're doing." In fact I've seen both sides kind of swirling together in the toilet bowl at times.
If I stop being greedy and make something, well sure I will submit. I'm just wondering if getting your film at Sundance signifigantly increases your odds of owning one of them slutty Sundance Utah groupie ho-bags for an evening or two, when you're sporting your badge and playing the part.
Maybe I just need to be beaten by a moderator for being a bad monkey.
But it just pushed my button a little as I used to listen to lots of pretentious format snob dribble strikingly similar to that "film is too important" spew in my edit bays. I always found it discouraging and kept a lot of good people down.
Maybe I just took it the wrong way.
Then again maybe posting ones rants on this topic is too complex an art form to be left in hands of people who don't know what they're doing. After all there are way too many people making way too many opinions - agreeable or otherwise.
:bath:
Give me lots of crap! Its a small price to pay...
RobMora said:
Rob, I see an angle you may be coming from but on the surface I totally disagree with you.
The big thing I see now compared to just ten years ago, are the number of barriers that have vanished between an idea and the finished product. I see this in print, photography and film & video too.
Yes we'll have to filter through some trash but I really don't want to go back to expensive proprietary hardware and systems, "Chief Editors" and other such self-inflating types treating me like a red headed stepchild when I am trying to further my quality and hopefully bring some good to the people.
If a lot of Joes and Janes trying to come up while making trash out there is the price I pay for a 24 Frame HD camera and a complete edit bay in a little white box all for less than a new VW – so be it! Give me a heap of it right now on my front door so then I can learn further what not to do and improve my work a little more the next time! And maybe we can give them a little help along the way too...
Back in the day, some of our people in our crews were like one legged cats trying to bury turds on a frozen pond. Still we worked through it, and after a few inside projects they began to get it. Before we knew we had people with a little talent and a lot of passion transcend from newsroom drones into beautiful editors in pre-read D2 heaven.
Yeah we had to mine coal to get diamonds. But when you have a bigger pile of coal, odds are you'll find even more diamonds.
I look forward to seeing some real crap on the big screen soon, especially if its some smelly crap and the screen is as big as IMAX and I get to pay $9.00 for it.
So then I may further appreciate really marvelous work as it glides across the screen and I walk away with a smile.
By the way, snotty film festivals certainly don't help filter the crap from the elite film artistes who "know what they're doing." In fact I've seen both sides kind of swirling together in the toilet bowl at times.
If I stop being greedy and make something, well sure I will submit. I'm just wondering if getting your film at Sundance signifigantly increases your odds of owning one of them slutty Sundance Utah groupie ho-bags for an evening or two, when you're sporting your badge and playing the part.
Maybe I just need to be beaten by a moderator for being a bad monkey.
But it just pushed my button a little as I used to listen to lots of pretentious format snob dribble strikingly similar to that "film is too important" spew in my edit bays. I always found it discouraging and kept a lot of good people down.
Maybe I just took it the wrong way.
Then again maybe posting ones rants on this topic is too complex an art form to be left in hands of people who don't know what they're doing. After all there are way too many people making way too many opinions - agreeable or otherwise.
:bath:
Last edited:
..over the years ive heard alot of the whole "sundance is rigged ..you cant get in without a golden ticket" type talk, but yet almost every year there are some major winners there that clearly were made by little independent nobodies that simply submitted thier film and got in and then sell it for a lot of money. films like "Primer" for example.. guy just makes a film .. its not about politics or sappy artistic viewpoints. its just a neat idea that was executed well enough to be marketable and get into the fest, and ends up winning the grand jury prize.
moving on ... blair witch didnt win anything there, but was marketabel to sell for alot of cash.. same for open water.
truth is, every year i watch alot of films that have won something at sundance , or sell well there just to try and narrow down what they are looking for, and find what strings together the types of films that "make it". and to be honest i havent really seen one yet that i thought was beyond the scope of any decent indi filmmaker making, and alot of them are from absolute nobodies. real independent success stories. so the way i see it, it doesnt matter what sort of stigma people have about the fest, or what eveter slantings if any go on behind the scenes. the fact is that if your an independent filmmaker that wants to move up in the business of filmmaking, sundance is the #1 place you could possibly be at, and to simply not try to get in would be putting oneself at a great disadvantage.
moving on ... blair witch didnt win anything there, but was marketabel to sell for alot of cash.. same for open water.
truth is, every year i watch alot of films that have won something at sundance , or sell well there just to try and narrow down what they are looking for, and find what strings together the types of films that "make it". and to be honest i havent really seen one yet that i thought was beyond the scope of any decent indi filmmaker making, and alot of them are from absolute nobodies. real independent success stories. so the way i see it, it doesnt matter what sort of stigma people have about the fest, or what eveter slantings if any go on behind the scenes. the fact is that if your an independent filmmaker that wants to move up in the business of filmmaking, sundance is the #1 place you could possibly be at, and to simply not try to get in would be putting oneself at a great disadvantage.