Context Behind the Making of Short Films. How they do it and why.
- In the 60’s and 70’s artistic film makers saw the short film as an art form in itself. It could allow an artist to experiment with new styles. Derek Jarman and Peter Greenaway to Isaac Julien and Andrew Kötting are all examples where this has happened.
- It is a personal ad for would-be-filmmakers it enables people to look out for stand-out-talent (a Lynne Ramsay or an Asif Kapadia) and help it to show up.
- Pixar from there beginning of production have used short films to judge for upcoming directors and writers and have screened their shorts before feature films to show a wider spectrum of film length. The shorts have also allowed them to experiment with new techniques and styles to then adapt in to their films.
- However, there were many people who did not see the interest in short films and as such the audiences were of small numbers for many screenings.
• the situation with short filmmaking when shorts were still being shot on celluloid
- It was difficult for unknown directors to receive public funding for the shorts which would give them there break
- Running parallel to this was the rising budgets in celluloid production with the budgets of Film Fours Short and Curlies regularly costing somewhere in the region of £60,000.
- The £90,000 budget for Tinge Krishnan's BAFTA-winning Shadowscan (2001) was a peak for the BFI's New Directors scheme.
- The costs were then hard to justify by the film-makers because of the audience reception being so low.
- However, these budgets were more justifiable when film-makers were using digital equipment.
The impact that DV technology has had on the short film
- The UK film council launched a three year scheme to support the production of digital short films in August 2001, pledging £1.5 million to produce 100 films each year as part of its digital shorts initiative.
these funds were to be matched by their regional partners, with each film to be shot for under £10,000 solely on digital, and it had to be less than 10 minutes long.
- The scheme got a mixed response "We were angrily told that it was impossible to make a decent film for less than £10,000, and that forcing people to shoot on digital was too restrictive," says Cooper Charles.
- People are still debating whether it is a good thing that collecting your angles on lightweight equipment and then condensing it in to a ten minute short- like a notebook - is the best way to shoot a film.
-Asif Kapadia, who has made a number of shorts including the acclaimed The Sheep Thief full version found at (http://tour.moviease.com/movie_player/letme?ref=46493) said that “When you're a film student you're very aware of how much film costs, so you're not going to start shooting until you know exactly what you want. There's a danger with digital that you don't make any real decisions until you're on set, and then you assume any problems can be sorted in post-production."
- Some directors however find the format liberating “The most successful digital shorts are those that work with the format rather than pretending to be shooting 16mm on the cheap," says Soledad Gatti-Pascual of London-based production company The Bureau.
- An example of where the medium is used to the film makers advantage is with Simon Ellis’. The film ‘What about the bodies’ he explains "I've learned how to make DV look less like DV, but that doesn't mean emulating celluloid."
- However no matter how digital production may be argued it is indisputable that the medium has allowed a larger production of shorts.
- It has opened up the production to a larger population of people, as it is cheaper in all four areas of production from the pre-production to distribution (youtube, vimeo etc.)
but not only this but it is drawing a large audienc as shown by the well attended Brief Encounters short-film festival held in Bristol, which had a turn-out of 5,000 people in 2003.
The distribution and exhibition possibilities for short films made in the UK
- A problem with shorts is finding a way to secure theatrical distribution. The most visible outlet for a short is to have it programmed with a feature, but this is rare.
getting a 16mm or 35mm print made from a digital master tape is very often unrealistically expensive, as it costs around £3000.
- Short circuit films has often tried funding distributors to attach the short film to a feature. Though this only tends to work if cinema managers are enthusiastic as the exhibition of the short is at their discretion.
- The length of the short also will determine whether it would be played before a feature as Damian Spandley explains “With a 90-minute feature we wouldn't usually run anything longer than ten minutes, and we wouldn't programme anything with a two-hour film."
- However a short under ten minutes can do well when given the platform “Desserts with Ewan McGregor was sold across Europe and Asia because it's a one-gag film that's under five minutes long"
- But these restrictions on length are not helpful to would-be-filmmakers. "The problem with most three-minute shorts is they're little more than a witty idea with a sting in its tail. Some short-film-makers aren't learning to develop characterisation, and so financiers aren't convinced they can make features," says Kapadia. "The British film industry should be doing more to help those who have made successful shorts but are struggling to make their first feature."
- A steady introduction of digital projection equipment in to UK cinemas will save costs of converting digital masters to film prints, as masters will be downloaded straight to cinema servers.
- Intitially their were problems with this as many cinemas did not offer digital projectors and as such the films were unable to be played in this way.
- Whilst not in the article the rise of real 3D in cinemas over the last three years has meant cinemas have begun to change to digital projection and it is estimated that by the end of 2011, 3000+ of the UK’s cinemas will have digital projection.
- Not only this but there are now several cinemas across the UK hosting monthly shorts events.
- in 2003 the UKFC’s ‘Big Stories/Small Flashes’ took nine films made under the digital shorts scheme to 30 cinemas including:
- and Luke Morris a london-based short-film producer put together a compilation DVD called Cinema 16 which included
- and Morris’ own nouvelle vague parody Je t’aime John Wayne.
- With sites and technology improving as well it means that web quality is no longer much of an issue making web streaming a similar quality to DVD, and in some cases to day better.
The conclusion reached by the writer about the situation of short film in the UK at the time of the article’s publication
- Short films are at their height in the UK as there are more starting film-makers creating hence more in production but also as a result older shorts are now being more frequently viewed and sort after as film-makers are wanting to analyse and research other filmmakers work.
- He thinks it has hit off also because “there are now virtually no obstacles to making your first moving-image work.”
- He feels that the UKFC’s sharpness to use the cheap DV to empower would-be filmmakers is a good thing but that it has drawbacks
- as so many people are applying for the funding there are around 1000 scripts to read a year the average quality of which can not be that high.
- he feels that the UKFC are leading the way for other regional bodies with in the UK to show that talent in their areas needs to be nurtured and that we need to recognise the talent and start helping those filmmakers to move on.
- However, he feels that the UK have been unable to find great auteurs in recent times but that hopefully with a lot of production happening talent will out.
How up to date do you think the article is
- I believe that the article was written in 2002-2003 as many of the events it explains are taking place or beginning all happened around this time frame.
- The digital projection movement with in cinemas started in 2002, but has boomed since as such it cannot have been written any later than 2005 or the number of cinemas written with in the article that had moved to digital would be far greater.
- It also mentions about the UK film council (UKFC) which was scrapped by the government in 2010 so it cannot have been written recently again for this reason.
Short films represent the way that many if not most filmmakers get recognised initially. Done superbly well, they can become a new director’s ticket onto the restricted access ladder that leads to making a feature film. Yet so many obstacles still stand in the way of short filmmakers and the all important “airplay” of the short films they make. How effectively does the article explain and answer this paradox?
The article focuses on this idea very heavily showing how it has been hard to even make shorts in the past and how that has changed in recent times, but also how even now with technology innovations it can still be hard for filmmakers to be noticed. It explains the difficulties with distribution of the shorts and the financial element which goes in to this but also how it has become easier to distribute because of technology evolving as it has. It shows the paradox in a full extent of the problem but leaves its answer very opinionated and almost unsolved. Whilst the writer has given their opinion on the subject, and of which I actually agree, I do feel that it does not fully answer the way that a would-be filmmaker can overcome the obstacles. But I believe that it is because there is no one simple solution, hence why so many directors and producers have there own stories of how they have made it and why the industry buzzes more than any other. It gives a full view on the situation that filmmakers were faced with at the time, however it now reads more like history as the UKFC which offers so many of the answers in the article has been disbanded by the government. So it now opens the question as to what is doing their job now?
Find two contemporary articles which examine the importance of short films and their effectiveness as stepping stones to longer format films for emerging filmmakers.
Categories:
Internet Based Research