From: Jason Halprin (email suppressed)
Date: Wed Feb 16 2011 - 09:49:17 PST
And I would add, just because your work can be seen worldwide, is it?
Getting back to Dominic's original querry, the proposal to extend exhibitions to
accommodate the amount of entries has many facets. For one thing, along with the
growth in entries, there has been a growth in festivals, both experimental and
otherwise. There has also been a growth (explosion is probably an apporpriate
term) in the the number of people getting degrees in film/video production, or
learning these skills through non-academic means. It might hold that the quality
of the "average" entry has dropped as modes of production have become cheaper
and easier to use (In my opinion, this is the case)...however, there is also a
place for more screenings. The question is how?
Some festivals use entry fees as a way to control the number of entries they
receive...the idea being that without this cost to the submitter, they would
have to reject even more entries. But one great practice I have seen is to waive
this fee for filmmakers who have previously screened at the festival, or in a
few cases, for filmmakers who have previously submitted work, regardless of
acceptance. This seems to me like a nice balance between being flooded with
inappropriate (for your festival) work and pushing the costs of processing
entries onto the filmmakers.
The other side of the increased number of exhibitions is of course the need for
more work on the part of festival staff and volunteers, increased shipping
costs, and increased venue costs. Given the scarcity of growth in funding for
the arts (which I suspect is universal. Please, correct me here, if I am
wrong.), accomodating more accepted entries might not be the best idea. Also, in
many locales, festivals of an experimental nature are a welcome once-a-year
event...but fatigue can set in. Last year in Chicago, Onion City and CUFF were
essentially back to back, and I found myself without the energy to attend nearly
as many screenings as I would like. I can only suspect that even more screenings
in both festivals would mean that the average attendance per screening would
drop, further cutting into the financial viability of each festival...and the
need to find more outside funding.
This is a conundrum for which I have no answer...I'm curious to see the
suggestions that come in.
-Jason Halprin
________________________________
From: Bryan McKay <email suppressed>
To: Experimental Film Discussion List <email suppressed>
Sent: Wed, February 16, 2011 11:30:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Frameworks] Current situation with Film Festivals
Because watching a film in the theatre still beats watching one on your computer
screen? Because YouTube still can't manage to screen 35mm or 16mm? Because you
want to support your local arts community? Because the sort of curation that
goes on at festival screenings can elaborate heretofore unseen thematic or
aesthetic links between disparate works? Because you might actually get a chance
to meet and chat with the filmmaker whose work you've just enjoyed? Because
having a shared experience in a dark room with a bunch of other people can be a
profoundly moving experience?
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
email suppressed
http://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks