Sundance.
- Thread starter Phil
- Start date
Barry_Green
Moderator
Re: Sundance.
Toronto is one of the premium festivals in the world. If you get into Toronto, that's REALLY saying something. The odds are exorbitantly high against getting selected, so don't get bummed out if you don't make it. Toronto, Telluride, SXSW, Sundance, Slamdance, Berlin, Cannes... those are *serious* film festivals, where (as someone else said) careers are made. Very, very, very difficult to get accepted to. So good luck, if you get in Toronto you will have scored a rare spot indeed!
Toronto is one of the premium festivals in the world. If you get into Toronto, that's REALLY saying something. The odds are exorbitantly high against getting selected, so don't get bummed out if you don't make it. Toronto, Telluride, SXSW, Sundance, Slamdance, Berlin, Cannes... those are *serious* film festivals, where (as someone else said) careers are made. Very, very, very difficult to get accepted to. So good luck, if you get in Toronto you will have scored a rare spot indeed!
Mike_Donis
Veteran
Re: Sundance.
Thanks TheAmPro!
And thanks Barry...guess I won't be getting any hopes up then - at least I'll get a nice surprize if anything does happen, and not be shocked if it doesn't! I always knew Toronto was a big film festival, but I never knew how hard it was to get in (ie, whether or not they mainly accept bigger stuff, as Sundance was accused of, or anything like that).
Thanks TheAmPro!
And thanks Barry...guess I won't be getting any hopes up then - at least I'll get a nice surprize if anything does happen, and not be shocked if it doesn't! I always knew Toronto was a big film festival, but I never knew how hard it was to get in (ie, whether or not they mainly accept bigger stuff, as Sundance was accused of, or anything like that).
Slapdragon
Well-known member
Re: Sundance.
[quote author=Mike_Donis link=board=Offtopic;num=1089261480;start=15#22 date=07/08/04 at 22:43:51]Thanks TheAmPro!
And thanks Barry...guess I won't be getting any hopes up then - at least I'll get a nice surprize if anything does happen, and not be shocked if it doesn't! I always knew Toronto was a big film festival, but I never knew how hard it was to get in (ie, whether or not they mainly accept bigger stuff, as Sundance was accused of, or anything like that). [/quote]
It is no shame to be refused from Toronto. I tell my students that, for me, a list of major film festivals that gave them the boot is pretty impressive, since most people have been given the boot by NO film festivals.
If not Toronto, try some of the smaller art based film festivals, often hosted by colleges. No money, but you can hang the win on your mantel and it is great experience.
[quote author=Mike_Donis link=board=Offtopic;num=1089261480;start=15#22 date=07/08/04 at 22:43:51]Thanks TheAmPro!
And thanks Barry...guess I won't be getting any hopes up then - at least I'll get a nice surprize if anything does happen, and not be shocked if it doesn't! I always knew Toronto was a big film festival, but I never knew how hard it was to get in (ie, whether or not they mainly accept bigger stuff, as Sundance was accused of, or anything like that). [/quote]
It is no shame to be refused from Toronto. I tell my students that, for me, a list of major film festivals that gave them the boot is pretty impressive, since most people have been given the boot by NO film festivals.
If not Toronto, try some of the smaller art based film festivals, often hosted by colleges. No money, but you can hang the win on your mantel and it is great experience.
Mike_Donis
Veteran
Re: Sundance.
yeah, thats what I was planning on doing...the way I see it is you've got nothing no lose in entering a film into any festival (well except maybe the entry fee, which normally isnt much
) but you have everything to potentially gain
yeah, thats what I was planning on doing...the way I see it is you've got nothing no lose in entering a film into any festival (well except maybe the entry fee, which normally isnt much
) but you have everything to potentially gainMike_Donis
Veteran
Re: Sundance.
Thanks!
Thanks!
Josh_Boelter
Well-known member
Re: Sundance.
I believe last year Toronto's policy towards digital was kind of ambigous, saying you could submit DV but if you get accepted you might have to transfer it to film. I might be remembering that incorrectly though. I think Toronto's 2004 submission guidelines are supposed to be on the web soon. They weren't there the last tiem I checked.
I believe last year Toronto's policy towards digital was kind of ambigous, saying you could submit DV but if you get accepted you might have to transfer it to film. I might be remembering that incorrectly though. I think Toronto's 2004 submission guidelines are supposed to be on the web soon. They weren't there the last tiem I checked.
Re: Sundance.
sundance was also screening films digitally in WM9 last year. otherwise you have to transfer the digital format to HDcam, 16mm or 35mm, but a transfer to HD is pretty cheap... espescally if youve got the equipment or know someone who does. if you want to screen digital, send it in early because they only have so many theatres that can screen digital (HD or WM9), and when they fill, the rest have to convert to film.
most of the films with the big name actors in it ARE NOT in competition at sundance. they are accepted on a premiere basis only. meaning that sundance has simply selected them to be able to premiere there.. but they are not eligable for any awards.. so theres no need to worry about the big films there. "Open Water" did not win any awards at all, and was actually not that praised by audiences there, but got big distribution anyway.. same goes for "The Blair Witch Project" som years ago .. it didnt win anything, and wasnt even that praised or even noticed, but it caught the eye of a distributer by chance and was distributed as the highest grossing independent of all time for a while. this year "PRIMER" (shot partially on scrap rolls of 16mm) won the grand jury prize, and i assure you its about as independent as it gets ...the budget was apx 7000.00. "NOVEMBER" (which was shot on the stock DVX100 lense with a follow focus and mattebox)won the cinematography award, and was made by INDIGENT.. the sort of creme de la creme of indy studios. but was still mad e for a shoestring budget which likely mostley went to pay the one big actor in it Courtney Cox... whos "mediocre acting" apparently kept the film from living up to its true potential.
anyway. if i have a point to speak in this besides spitting some facts, its that Sundance still is a place for independents, and thats what they push.. new, independent, different, exploratory, and good cinema. so your chances of getting in and winning all boil down to this:
how good your film is.
if your film is good enough.. you will get in. if your film is great enough.. you will win something. if you then sign on the dotted line.. you will be distributed.
sundance was also screening films digitally in WM9 last year. otherwise you have to transfer the digital format to HDcam, 16mm or 35mm, but a transfer to HD is pretty cheap... espescally if youve got the equipment or know someone who does. if you want to screen digital, send it in early because they only have so many theatres that can screen digital (HD or WM9), and when they fill, the rest have to convert to film.
most of the films with the big name actors in it ARE NOT in competition at sundance. they are accepted on a premiere basis only. meaning that sundance has simply selected them to be able to premiere there.. but they are not eligable for any awards.. so theres no need to worry about the big films there. "Open Water" did not win any awards at all, and was actually not that praised by audiences there, but got big distribution anyway.. same goes for "The Blair Witch Project" som years ago .. it didnt win anything, and wasnt even that praised or even noticed, but it caught the eye of a distributer by chance and was distributed as the highest grossing independent of all time for a while. this year "PRIMER" (shot partially on scrap rolls of 16mm) won the grand jury prize, and i assure you its about as independent as it gets ...the budget was apx 7000.00. "NOVEMBER" (which was shot on the stock DVX100 lense with a follow focus and mattebox)won the cinematography award, and was made by INDIGENT.. the sort of creme de la creme of indy studios. but was still mad e for a shoestring budget which likely mostley went to pay the one big actor in it Courtney Cox... whos "mediocre acting" apparently kept the film from living up to its true potential.
anyway. if i have a point to speak in this besides spitting some facts, its that Sundance still is a place for independents, and thats what they push.. new, independent, different, exploratory, and good cinema. so your chances of getting in and winning all boil down to this:
how good your film is.
if your film is good enough.. you will get in. if your film is great enough.. you will win something. if you then sign on the dotted line.. you will be distributed.
Mike_Donis
Veteran
Re: Sundance.
[quote author=Josh_Boelter link=board=Offtopic;num=1089261480;start=15#27 date=07/09/04 at 04:51:51]I believe last year Toronto's policy towards digital was kind of ambigous, saying you could submit DV but if you get accepted you might have to transfer it to film.[/quote]
This year's submission form said the same thing...but I emailed the festival and asked them about it...the response was: "you will be able to screen the film digitally if selected".
[quote author=Josh_Boelter link=board=Offtopic;num=1089261480;start=15#27 date=07/09/04 at 04:51:51]I believe last year Toronto's policy towards digital was kind of ambigous, saying you could submit DV but if you get accepted you might have to transfer it to film.[/quote]
This year's submission form said the same thing...but I emailed the festival and asked them about it...the response was: "you will be able to screen the film digitally if selected".
Re: Sundance.
cool.. well you have to figure that every year they will screen more and more digitally. because that is the way cinema is heading. i doubt they would be removing any digital projectors.. only adding
which makes it all the more possible to make it happen. you can uprez uzing photozoom and wm9 right on your desktop for the cost of the programs divided by how many times you use them forever, and it makes it possible for ANYONE.. no matter what budget to get in, and get noticed, and get signed, and then get a cine alta950 or Arri HDcam and do it all over again.. (with distribution alreay in place sometimes!)lol.
but more importantly it takes the cost of the film transfer out of the hands of the filmmakers. so i can do it all digital , and if some studio picks it up for distribution..they do the rest.. and i will never see the cost of a film transfer.
cool.. well you have to figure that every year they will screen more and more digitally. because that is the way cinema is heading. i doubt they would be removing any digital projectors.. only adding
which makes it all the more possible to make it happen. you can uprez uzing photozoom and wm9 right on your desktop for the cost of the programs divided by how many times you use them forever, and it makes it possible for ANYONE.. no matter what budget to get in, and get noticed, and get signed, and then get a cine alta950 or Arri HDcam and do it all over again.. (with distribution alreay in place sometimes!)lol.but more importantly it takes the cost of the film transfer out of the hands of the filmmakers. so i can do it all digital , and if some studio picks it up for distribution..they do the rest.. and i will never see the cost of a film transfer.