old draft of rules... please disregard...

Status
Not open for further replies.
you can have anyone make them... That's fine. I'm sure you can find some folks in the "TagTeam" section who are willing to take on the task to do some posters for some folks.

later,
jason
 
Barry_Green said:
We prefer not to have exhibition-only films. We much prefer that you approach the festival as it is intended.

Exhibition-only films are those that *almost* qualified, but had to be disqualified for some reason or other. But the filmmaker set out to comply with the rules, and (usually) submits the film thinking that he or she has indeed complied with the rules, and cannot modify the film in time to comply with the rules. In cases like those, we will occasionally allow them to be listed in an "exhibition only" category.

If you set out to make a film that will not comply with the fest, then don't submit it to the fest. Instead, you can start a User Films thread for that film.
Click to expand...

I see. That makes sense. Okay, I'll stay out of this one. I started writing the script before the fest was announced, but the material really seems to fit the theme of this fest. I certainly did not jump into this to intentionally make a film that doesn't comply with the regulations of the festival. I just assumed that since I've participated before, I could try to work in a smaller version of my film that will deal with a monster in a surrealistic drama/horror film.

Anyway, thanks for clearing that up. I never really knew before what constitutes an "exhibition only" film besides running over the limit. I know past films tried to cut it down but couldn't. Should have thought of that sooner.
 
Last edited:
Barry_Green said:
For some reason I don't think Sylar is a "monster". He's a bad dude with "abilities" but does that make him a "monster"?
Click to expand...

I think this particular situation deserves discussion and clarification. I think Sylar should be considered a monster. He possesses inhuman or superhuman abilities and is clearly evil and does evil things. Sure he is troubled and has been influenced and manipulated by his past and things happening to him now, but you could argue that to some degree about many monsters.

Also, how about the movie "Monster" starring Charlize Theron? I mean, they called the movie "Monster". She (as Aileen Wuornos) is not the alien from "Aliens" or "Predator", but to me she's clearly a monster because of the things she did. And it's based on a real person in case anyone isn't aware of the movie.

I think this is important as I was thinking about finally entering a DVXfest with a film of my own, but wanted to lean more towards "monster" in the psychological, symbolic, and/or metaphorical sense. I wanted to stay away from making a film about a "monster" in the literal and traditional sense.

So clarification on this aspect of "monster" could make a huge difference for me and I imagine others as well.
 
Mike@AF said:
Also, how about the movie "Monster" starring Charlize Theron? I mean, they called the movie "Monster". She (as Aileen Wuornos) is not the alien from "Aliens" or "Predator", but to me she's clearly a monster because of the things she did. And it's based on a real person in case anyone isn't aware of the movie.
Click to expand...
Don't worry.

This...
If referring to a human, a person referred to as a monster is taken as exceptionally evil, grotesque, unreasonably strict and uncaring, sociopathic, and/or sadistic.
Click to expand...
Covers Aileen Wuornos just fine. :)

Movies about serial killers will fit right in.

MAH
 
See, but that's the problem -- while we put in there about those folks, it leaves the theme so unfocused as to make it, really, meaningless.

The mods are very seriously considering changing that rule to specify that a monster is a monster. Psychological effects, etc., would be better left to a different fest, such as PsychoFest or DramaFest or something like that.

This is our traditional Halloween festival, and it just doesn't seem theme-appropriate that we would have Charlize Theron "Monster" type films. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Michael Myers, maybe. But abusive daddy and child molester films? For this fest? Really? Seems like a circumvention of the intention of the theme, even if the Wiki description of a monster seems to allow it.
 
Barry_Green said:
See, but that's the problem -- while we put in there about those folks, it leaves the theme so unfocused as to make it, really, meaningless.

The mods are very seriously considering changing that rule to specify that a monster is a monster. Psychological effects, etc., would be better left to a different fest, such as PsychoFest or DramaFest or something like that.

This is our traditional Halloween festival, and it just doesn't seem theme-appropriate that we would have Charlize Theron "Monster" type films. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Michael Myers, maybe. But abusive daddy and child molester films? For this fest? Really? Seems like a circumvention of the intention of the theme, even if the Wiki description of a monster seems to allow it.
Click to expand...

If you didn't want this then you shouldn't have put this in....

If referring to a human, a person referred to as a monster is taken as exceptionally evil, grotesque, unreasonably strict and uncaring, sociopathic, and/or sadistic.
Click to expand...
You can always change it since it's still early. :)

Frankly, I think seeing a lot of monsters might grow tiresome but it's your call. The rule quoted above might at least add some variance.
 
With every fest we get lots and lots of PMs from people asking if their particular idea "fits the theme".

Sometimes it seems like the artists in the community are just pushing the boundaries because, hey, that's what artists do.

But sometimes it seems like the definition, or the theme, should be easy enough to accomodate.

For example: if I said "hey, did you see that new monster movie at the multiplex?" would you think I was talking about "Taken"? It could be argued that the thugs in Taken were monsters, by the above definition, but come on, everyone everywhere would know that "Taken" wasn't a "monster movie", right? It's like the famous definition of obscenity by supreme court justice Potter Stewart, who said (paraphrased) "I may not be able to define it, but I know it when I see it."

Could it be argued that Anthony Perkins' character Norman Bates was a "monster"? Probably. Would "Psycho" be appropriate for MonsterFest? Probably not. I mean, wouldn't something like that be much more appropriate for something like PsychoFest, or CrazyFest, or PsychologyFest, or even DramaFest?

So yes, perhaps that description shouldn't be in the rules, and perhaps we'll change it.
 
Hmm perhaps I'll re-write my psycho killer into a vampire... actually really starting to dig that direction... off to go find some teeth...
 
Barry_Green said:
So yes, perhaps that description shouldn't be in the rules, and perhaps we'll change it.
Click to expand...
I don't think there's any question about it. If you don't want any human monsters then the rule I quoted should be removed.

The current rules allow it even without any artist interpretation or boundary pushing. It's as plain as day as far as I can see. It states 'human' and 'sociopath'.

That equals serial killer.
 
Barry, that would be cool to actually put some "teeth" into this fest and require it to be an actual monster of some sort.

Great example of telling someone 'hey, did you see the new monster movie??'
 
There are always many ways to define a theme, but being our "dark" theme and falling on Halloween I agree with the idea of removing the "psychological monster" ideas and leaving traditional, gross exaggerations/exceptions of nature that pop into your head when you (as Barry mentions) reference the "latest monster movie".
 
I don't even participate beyond watching but since there's no required element and it's for Halloween, to get more people to submit...

Is it too late to vote in for a broad theme?

SCARE FEST instead of MONSTER FEST?

I'd think many more people would enter, as much as Drama Fest and as good as Drama fest if things were broad.
 
Larry R said:
There are always many ways to define a theme, but being our "dark" theme and falling on Halloween I agree with the idea of removing the "psychological monster" ideas and leaving traditional, gross exaggerations/exceptions of nature that pop into your head when you (as Barry mentions) reference the "latest monster movie".
Click to expand...

But a vampire is also a legitimate monster, it's not a 'gross exaggeration' but it does feed on the blood of the living!
 
it's not a gross exaggeration, but it is an exception of nature. It's not natural for a humanoid creature, in our known view of nature, to require the feeding of blood
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top