You made a great film. Now give it a great run.
A fun “infographic” from the BBC. (In quotes because the graphic really doesn’t contribute much to the info that an article couldn’t have communicated equally well.)
My favorite number: 10, the cost in Euros of a beer in a Cannes nightclub. (That’s about $13 US for those of you who don’t convert in your head.)
Read all the way to the bottom for the number 0.
Ann Hornaday, writing for The Washington Post:
The festival, now known as AFI Docs presented by Audi, will have a new presence in Washington, its director, Sky Sitney, announced Thursday. In addition to gala screenings at the Newseum, the festival will present films at other D.C. venues, including the National Portrait Gallery and the National Museum of American History.
It’s always risky for a festival to expand to new venues and new audiences, but it sounds like the right time and the right reasons for the festival formerly known as Silverdocs.
Doug Block, writing for The D-Word:
Hot Docs staffers Charlotte Cook, Elizabeth Radshaw, Sarafina DiFelice, Stephanie McArthur, Chloe Sosa-Sims, Ellen Tang and Dorota Lech will help us kick off our annual Hot Docs topic, which continues through the festival (April 25 to May 5) and beyond.”
The D-Word is a great site for doc filmmakers, and this “virtual lounge” concept looks like an interesting way to get direct access to festival programmers and staff. If you’ve got a question, post it now before they get too busy to answer.
Heather Croall, writing for Indiewire:
Filmmakers deserve more money for their hard work on making their films. It’s time to look at who’s really benefiting from, and piggybacking on, their success. Analyze the budgets – are there any people in the budget earning fees for hard-to-define roles? Is all film funding going directly to the filmmakers? If not, where is it getting stuck along the way? Analyze the contracts – who gets what in the back end, so to speak?
Tom Hall from the Sarasota Film Festival, responding on Indiewire to a recent article by Sean Farnel which promoted the idea that festivals should share ticketing revenue with filmmakers:
…a reality check seems in order; in almost all cases, there is no profit to share and the loss of revenue from ticketing would create another economic disadvantage in an already difficult environment. That said, festivals must work with filmmakers to help create real value for their films, value that capitalizes on the rapidly changing marketplace without repeating the failed models of the past.
I didn’t link to Farnel’s original piece because, frankly, it is an argument which surfaces all the time. “Festivals spend all that money on plane tickets and parties,” goes the thinking, “so why can’t they kick some of that ticketing revenue back to the filmmakers?” I’ve written rebuttals before (here’s one from 2008), but the bottom line is, as Hall points out, that there is very little revenue to share. (Never mind that the accounting would be nightmarish.)
I like Hall’s attempt to shift the focus from potential monetary compensation to the value that festivals should bring to filmmakers and their films in other ways. Hopefully we can put this idea to rest for another few months.
Jason Guerrasio, writing for Indiewire:
Since 2008, a string of film/screenwriting competition events, or events that call themselves film festivals but do not screen films to the public, have popped up on Withoutabox that are misleading filmmakers into thinking that they are submitting to regional festivals set in beautiful locales when in fact they are sending their work to mere online competitions that may or may not have an event to celebrate the award winners.
What is impressive about this article is not so much the number of scam festivals outed here, but the fact that it still just scratches the surface of the questionable events that take money from credulous filmmakers. Scam fests are a relative rarity in terms of their percentage of the festival populace, but many filmmakers adopt a shotgun submission strategy. The result is many a wasted submission fee – sometimes on scams, sometimes on festivals that just aren’t appropriate for your film.
Tatiana Siegel, writing for SThe Hollywood Reporter:
As the flu wreaks havoc nationwide, the Park City Medical Center is trying to keep the pesky virus from crashing the party by handing out 5,000 free bottles of hand sanitizer.
[Festivalgoers are encouraged to] Get plenty of sleep and exercise, drink lots of water, and eat healthy foods.
As one commenter points out, these are three things that are basically impossible to do at a film festival.
(Hat tip to Lisa Vandever at Cinekink.)
As for Sundance, the PCMC is urging fest-goers to:
Tom Roston, writing for the New York Times:
Career highlights may await filmmakers whose movies have been accepted at the Sundance Film Festival, which begins Thursday in Park City, Utah. But more common is the hurt, frustration and fallback strategizing that occupies the thousands of directors whose dreams have been dashed. Of more than 12,000 films submitted to this year’s Sundance, only 193 landed slots.
This is further compounded by the perception that there are only a handful of festivals that “matter” – as if anything but the most stellar of festival runs invalidates one’s existence as a filmmaker.
No question, it’s great to play Sundance. Or Tribeca. Or South by Southwest. But plenty of filmmakers have has fulfilling festival runs playing smaller festivals like Sidewalk and Newport Beach and IFF Boston. Some made incredible careers for themselves without playing a single festival. It’s a big world of moving pictures out there, and festivals represent one corner of it.
Film Festival Secrets: A Handbook for Independent Filmmakers
Written especially for people trying to navigate the film festival circuit. Start reading now or buy a copy of your very own.
|
|
About