Virtues of a Short film

Not to mention shorts are wonderful, low/no risk ventures where you can hone your skills, discover what you're good at, and what you need more help with.
 
I think the Youtube era has really damaged the reputation of short films. When done well, they are a legitimate and beautiful form of storytelling. Sure you could argue all day about whether they have the merits that feature films do, and I think it's obvious that features take us to greater heights, shorts can still be wonderful.

Problem is, everyone has to make shorts before they can make features. Very few people actually get to the level of making features, but almost everyone who has ever dreamed of being a filmmaker has made a few shorts. The result, is a market flooded with crap. This has led everyone to view shorts as simply practice, as something easy and cheap to see if you've got the chops. I think very few people not in the film world could even name a short film they liked outside of the pixar animated shorts and possibly The Red Balloon.

Despite my like of short films, even I admit I don't want to make them forever. Like everyone else, I want to make features one day, and if I ever get to that point, i'm not sure I would ever want to make something short again. But who knows. I think ultimately if a story pulls at your heart and it's best suited for a short piece, that's what it's got to be.
 
Yes, shorts are great, more important narrative structure, a clear moral delivered.
Agree, lots of crap, on youtube, and more so on vimeo called "films", some camera tests, cut to a music score, some fashion bshit, some meaningless weddings cut to cheese songs, called cinematic.. all that just marketing, PR, has nothing to do with films in it's purest essence.
Have to study a lot, mostly not how to film, but what, what is there to be said, expressed!
just my HO.
 
+1 for the points raised above. Sure there's a lot of crap out there and stuff mislabeled as 'short film', but the short narrative film in the pure sense is still a legitimate form of artistic expression. There are short stories and there are novels. These are related forms of expression that the writer can move between depending on the story being told e.g James Joyce expressing himself in short story format in 'Dubliners' and in novel format in 'Ulysses'. Likewise, there are short films and features, related forms of expression that the filmmaker can move between depending on the story being told e.g Kurosawa expressing himself in 'Seven Samurai' and through the short films in 'Dreams'. And a good artist chooses the form which best suits the story. I think Joyce's 'The Dead' is a good example of a short story that works perfectly as a short story, while 'Ulysses' obviously wouldn't have worked in a shorter form! Equally, Kurosawa's 'The Tunnel' works perfectly as a short film, while 'Seven Samurai' wouldn't....

Short films do tend to work best when they focus on a single idea, so you could say that precise and consistent thematic focus is one virtue of the form. You have limited time/space to explore that single idea in a short film too, so you tend not to have the same level of character and plot development as you would in a feature. This too is a virtue if it suits the story - some stories don't need a lot of character or plot development. Another virtue is that you have to be absolutely disciplined in dialogue and shot selection, cutting absolutely anything extraneous no matter how slight. I know you could say the same applies to a feature, but there does appear to me to be a little more breathing room available to indulge. And finally, from the audience perspective, the short film simply requires less investment in time and energy to take it all in and the experience of watching a good short can be every bit as emotionally uplifting or intellectually challenging as watching a feature. That's a real virtue.
 
Back
Top