Sundance 2013 - Ya gotta read this!

K

Kess

Well-known member
Interesting article accusing Sundance of not actually reviewing submissions. I don't know what is factual, but it is interesting to think about. Do they watch the submissions or not?

http://sundancefilmfestival2013.com/

This might drum up some comments. What are your thoughts?
 
Whatever the truth about Sundance's (and other festivals') practices are, this is one seriously wacked-out article.

Yeesh...
 
I haven;t had time to read the linked article but I do want to say this

Film submissions are off the hook, all festivals are saying this (because digital cameras are now so inexpensive).

Increased submissions = increased revenue.

I have not seen any festivals increasing the number of theaters or films that they screen.
 
i don't think any Sundance attendee can actually watch all the screened movies in one category in one week. so why would they increase the number of films? only a small percentage of the movies in the festival get exposure as it is.
 
the person writing the article is just confused. the process is on Sundance website, and the competition is just part of the festival, the name actors and directors are screened in the non competing category. and most of the submission are short films and not features.
 
I was thinking the same thing Amr. Some whacked out people...but it is interesting to think about the amount of submissions and how on earth can they review them all? It's kind of like script submissions. Do they read 10 pages...2 pages...? For the film submissions do they watch 30 seconds...10 minutes..? I can think of a few great films where the first 10 minutes would not have impressed me. Anybody work for a film festival? What are there viewer requirements for a feature film?
 
There was someone on here bout 9months ago acussing of exactly the same thing and threatening legal action, wonder if its the same, disgruntled punter haha
 
J Davis said:
exactly, it should be a percentage relative to the amount of money they are raking in, but its not, its a fixed number.
Click to expand...

a small percentage of the official selection in the festival, the movies that got in, get exposure and is talked about.

out of,
15 movies in US dramatic competing
15 movies in US dramatic non competing
some at midnight movies
some documentary
some intl dramatic competing
some intl dramatic non competing
and about 50 shorts in 5 programs

the average attendee cannot view for example the movies in US dramatic competing and non competing entries and a couple of docs in just 5 or 7 days, where the first or last days they are only showing 1 or 2 screenings. so as it is, the attendee, movie fan, filmmaker, or producer is already filtering the entries by exposure and word of mouth, increasing the number of movies in the competition is not a good idea. now adjusting and increasing the screenings of the entries could be a valid request.

i do not think that the increase in the number of submissions means more good movies, it just means more people are submitting more short films of not so good quality.
 
All festivals are a filtering process based on the criteria that the festival represents - be it Sundance, Telluride, Family, Gay & Lesbian, etc. The amount of submissions have probably gone up 10 fold over the past 5 years, as mentioned already due to the cost of entry being lower. Kess compared it to readers at studios for screenplays. An interesting book on that process is called "Screenplay Story Analysis" by Asher Garfinkle. I am sure they get watched on a lot of different criteria of which story, performance, direction, and production value are all considered. In some cases, it may not take long to make judgement. Those that pass, go on to next screeners, etc. down to the curator of the festival itself. I am sure in those last few rounds, the entire film is being watched. I submitted to Sundance 3 years ago, and if I tried interpreted my submission number I am going to guess there were about 5,000 feature length dramatic films submitted. But my interpretation may be wrong, but sounds right to me. Since all entrants are notified around the same time, it's hard to tell where in the process it was eliminated.

Michael
 
i would reckon most submissions are not even dramas, most would likely be horror shorts and movies that would not even qualify for the dramatic competition. the film festival website is very clear on what they are looking for and you can see what they select from years past.
 
That was a largely incoherent and mostly unreadable article. If that person tried to submit a film that was in any way similar to that article, I don't think a screener would need a whole 30 seconds to reject the film.

The sad fact is that there are probably tens of thousands of shorts, features and docs started in the US every year (not all of them are finished). Nearly all of them are made by people who think they're going to win at Sundance. Nearly all of them are crap. I have great sympathy for the people who do the initial screening for Sundance. They endure so much pain & suffering.

For the record, I have "read" screenplays for projects that I was thinking about editing and rejected them before finishing the 1st page. I have "screened" films that I was thinking about doing the finishing work for and have rejected them after only a minute or 2. First impressions, justified or not, are the most important ones.
 
Last edited:
The article clearly was not written by someone who understands contract law. I would bet that if you cannot prove that a submission does not get, say, a minimum of 30 seconds, you would not have a case for a refund If you see a statement that reads along the lines "... the reviewers are under no obligation to review all submissions" they are clearly off the hook Even where there is compliance with a presumed 30-sec review things are difficult in that a film maker has no way to know what the credentials of different reviewers are. So, you might find that something coming in with nothing more than a catchy title might get a "proper" 30-second review whereas another submission might be relegated to a reviewer where the main focus is on pushing the STOP button at the 30-second mark. As for "rights' these are what you agree to, you submit, you are subject to the rights. End of. Of course, it is one-sided.
 
According to today's posting on the Sundance Film Festival facebook wall, the festival received 12,146 submissions. The first time breaking 12,000.

Michael
 
It's an interesting take. But I don't think it's 100% accurate. The better known film festivals, now a days anyways, get more submission then in the past. So it's hard for them watch everything.

In some cases, your best bet is to get picked up by the "smaller" film festivals, and to slowly build buzz.

That way you have a much better chance of getting picked up by the better known festivials.
 
Manee Osman said:
In some cases, your best bet is to get picked up by the "smaller" film festivals, and to slowly build buzz. That way you have a much better chance of getting picked up by the better known festivials.
Click to expand...

Be sure to read the submission requirements of the festivals, as some don't allow entry if already submitted or won in a previous festival.

Michael
 
Manee Osman said:
...

In some cases, your best bet is to get picked up by the "smaller" film festivals, and to slowly build buzz.

That way you have a much better chance of getting picked up by the better known festivials.
Click to expand...

Name three festivals you've submitted YOUR OWN stuff to where this strategy worked for you personally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top