Judging The IAC Competition
Posted: Sat May 07, 2005 11:33 am
Willy, it was good to read some explanation concerning your Dickens film which
I watched with great interest at Chesterfield. I too found the atmosphere
rather stilted and could not quite put my finger on the cause of the problem
and you have helped identify it. Acting is a tremendous problem with amateur
film making and is the reason I stick to documentaries! Having said that
there were two films (one French, the other Czech) displaying quite wonderful
acting and I am trying to find out whether the actors in the Czech one (All
Photographs Returned) were professionals or drama students. Your production
values were of the highest, particularly the lighting and sound, and clearly
expert care went into the research, costumes and settings. Historical reconstructions
are often unconvincing I am afraid, notably on television where the absence
of unfamiliar archive footage is forcing producers to go the 'drama documentary'
route - it rarely works in my judgement.
Your thoughts on judges comments are interesting. I do find that whilst
they fulfil a useful function for younger producers those of us more experienced
ones know well enough if we have made a good or bad film and also where the
weaknesses lie - whether we can do anything about them is entirely another
matter! Artists (and film makers) generally find it difficult to change
(except Picasso!) and tend to go on very much as before.
Willy, are planning to go to the Guernsey Lily?
Michael Slowe.
I watched with great interest at Chesterfield. I too found the atmosphere
rather stilted and could not quite put my finger on the cause of the problem
and you have helped identify it. Acting is a tremendous problem with amateur
film making and is the reason I stick to documentaries! Having said that
there were two films (one French, the other Czech) displaying quite wonderful
acting and I am trying to find out whether the actors in the Czech one (All
Photographs Returned) were professionals or drama students. Your production
values were of the highest, particularly the lighting and sound, and clearly
expert care went into the research, costumes and settings. Historical reconstructions
are often unconvincing I am afraid, notably on television where the absence
of unfamiliar archive footage is forcing producers to go the 'drama documentary'
route - it rarely works in my judgement.
Your thoughts on judges comments are interesting. I do find that whilst
they fulfil a useful function for younger producers those of us more experienced
ones know well enough if we have made a good or bad film and also where the
weaknesses lie - whether we can do anything about them is entirely another
matter! Artists (and film makers) generally find it difficult to change
(except Picasso!) and tend to go on very much as before.
Willy, are planning to go to the Guernsey Lily?
Michael Slowe.