Cotswold IFF

[Peter Copestake]

Looking back at some judges reports from this sadly expired festival we noticed that the first category they had to comment on, "Audience appeal/entertainment value" is followed by "Also BME"
What did that stand for, please?
Peter.

[Dave Watterson]

Hi Peter - since the founder and organiser of the Cotswold Festival comes on here now and then I gave him time to respond ... but perhaps he is busy with his latest production.

BME simple stands for Beginning - Middle - End and is used here to mean "Does the film have a structure?"

[Mike Shaw]

Oh! And not "Bloody Miserable Edit!" then?

or

"Big Mistake Entering"

or

.... you get the drift.

[Peter Copestake]

I was more on Mike's line but more polite, but thank you, Dave. Makes sense.
Peter.

[Lee Prescott]

So Sorry late in this response re BME....(I've been flying my kite) ---I find myself a bit baffled really, I was "brunged up" to understand that all film makers, especially in the IAC, knew what BME stood for!

It means as Dave has said BEGINING, MIDDLE AND END, proper "construction" of a
film et al.

As for Mike's comment, come on, no way on this planet, or the next, would I countenance any insulting remarks if I spotted 'em. I've had enough over the years and very recently from certain IAC so called judges who shall remain nameless at this juncture. I'll just say the "3 stooges" in question have 3/4s wrecked a new Unit, (Club), with their stupid, extremely wide of the mark with their so called “critiques” which are full of nothing but Assumptions, Suppositions, Speculation, Surmise and Negativity with nothing at all “Constructive”. Neither are there any thoughts about any target audience, film construction, (BME), or specifications etc.

I now take this opportunity to wish you all A Happy Christmas and a Good New Year
---just click on this URL-----
[color=#0040FF]http://www.youtube-nocoo ... =0[/color]

Cheers. Lee.

[Dave Watterson]

Lee, can I just point out that there are NO "IAC judges" as such.

There are people, who may be IAC members, who give up their time and often meet their own expenses, to judge films.
From your notes in SoCo news I gather that the ones who annoyed you came from one particular IAC Region ... but I doubt that they were formally endorsed by the Region, let alone by the IAC nationally. They are just folk who volunteered to do the work.

If they all happened to wear sweaters would you call them "pullover judges"?

They may or may not be good judges, without knowing the films concerned and reading their comments none of us can comment on that.

It is a great pity that their remarks have annoyed some young film makers, but there is also a sense that if you cannot stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. A few years ago I was upset to hear that a very young film maker had been reduced to tears by what I intended as kind but critical comment on a first film. In that case I wish the (film maker) parents had stopped the youngster entering the IAC Competition where the work had to be judged by international standards. Maybe the young film makers in your case had not yet reached a level where their work should have been put into competition.

You know from your own decade of running the Cotswold International Film Festival that neither organisers or judges try to upset film makers. We all share the same hobby and we all want to encourage better film making.

[Mike Shaw]

It appears the humour intended in my interpretation of BME was lost...

What you might call a Bad Message Experience.

[Peter Copestake]

Reminds me of the goats in Crete - seemed like 8 - 10 feet up bushes of hawthorn type. So that is why they have cloven hooves!
Peter.

[Lee Prescott]

Well Dave you and I have been friends for a long time and I remain indebted to you for all the help and for your time that you so generously gave to me. ....HoWeVeR:
Here we differ.....

As Far as I am concerned and all those of my personal acquaintance etc. they are very much IAC Judges! Why? because they "represent the IAC and what it stands for" in the perception of most entrants and that is World Wide not just UK! They are ALL Ambassadors of and for the IAC and it would merit everyone a great deal IF those performing this duty as such remembered that! Whether the IAC, any member etc. thereof likes it or not, in this respect the name of the game is Perception! Especially where, what I might call, Strangers or Newcomers are concerned.

Frankly I get very tired of this non stop "accolade - excuse" of giving up their time and own expenses - that does not warrant insulting rudeness in my book, never has and never will!

You're quite correct in that the ones I refer to came from one particular region but as to being formally "endorsed" one of 'em at least is or was Chair - person, 'orrible word. Another was an ex Chairman as I understand it. As to them "volunteering to do the work" , both they and the IAC in general would do far better if they, in particular, "went to sleep"!

"Pullover judges" - sorry don't get it! --- I have always maintained and it is true, that any Judge and his / her ablity can be directly assessed precisely, from what they write!

As to their so called "comments" - note not "contructive critiques" !!!! I have been at this game long enough, 1960 to be precise, professionally previously from1956 to 1968, so no further comments et al are required from anyone else. Enough is quite enough in that respect.... The "explosive" result from the Young People here was sufficient, we've almost lost it together with all the hard work involved. The IAC certainly has!

As to Old President Harry Trueman's comment that you quote: "If you cannot stand the heat stay out of the kitchen" - hardly applies to present day Youngsters in the 14 to 18 age group surely. Trueman also said: "The Buck Stops Here" - (with him) - and in this particular case it stops with the IAC, its representatives, "Generalissimos" and "Ambassadors"!

Hey: We're not talking here of International Standards, we're talking of a very simple Regional Competition. In any case WHY should a Young Person be "Stopped" from entering any competition? (To quote you).

** From figures I have seen the membership of the IAC, individually and clubs continues
to drop - Young People are still no longer joining then? No wonder!

As to your comments Dave re "organisers / judges" do not try to upset film makers OK? - But re the IAC "Daddy Knows Best Syndrome" they do don't they, if not all of 'em, and often very much so to my certain knowledge! - I know for a fact that is what happened to at least two very well known fully fledged film makers in OZ - and who never entered BIAFF again! Also to a certain gentleman, now deceased, from the Midlands reference just three!

Yes, I agree, that we all want to encourage better film making, "odd though that the goal posts keep shifting" in this "modern age" - again something that many in the IAC
cannot appreciate!

Finally: I confirm that my main motivation for organising The Cotswold International Film Festival and all that followed, until the funding dried up, was the absolute rubbish that emanated from the IAC Annual Competition.(now BIAFF)!

Best wishes, Lee.

[Mike Shaw]

Where I do agree with Lee is - there is absolutely no excuse for insulting rudeness in a critique for a movie. That is unforgiveable: constructive rather than destructive must always be the mantra.

However.

With the kind of vitriol that is aimed at judges in general, it makes you wonder why anyone would be mad enough to agree to give up their time be an IAC judge. If all judges decided that it is no longer worth their while putting their head above the parapets (freely), then competition would die completely.

The question is, who will then put together, say, a 5 hour show from 10 hours worth of film? And explain to those left out, why they have been left out. Programme selectors are also judging, are they not?

I am getting very tired of the continual 'judge-bashing' that goes on, usually from people who believe that their films are of a better/higher standard than other people deem on seeing them 'for the first time'. There was discussion - here and everywhere - that judges should provide constructive help on how a film might be improved. Nice aim ... but who has the time to devote hour upon hour to thoroughly analysing each and every one of dozens of films, and writing up tutorials for their makers? I don't see many hands now waving in the air.

Like everyone else, I've seen what I believe to be 'incorrect judgements' - films marked higher, and films marked lower than I deemed appropriate. And I've seen my own films suffer - or enjoy - the same: some judged lower than I hoped, others (much) higher than I expected. Where reasons were given, I learned something, Where reasons weren't given, I tried to glean something from the comments. And carried on, remembering that no IAC judge is a professional judge ... in fact, there is no such thing as a 'professional judge', only people with experience in particular fields. I - and you - often don't agree with the crits given to pro films released at cinemas. Why is that, do you think? And these 'pro' critics, 99.9% of the time, are not even film makers.

Have I ever complained about judges? Yes. At one West Country Festival that I was badgered into entering (at a cost), my movie came third: the judge's considered comment/critique was just eight words long, to the effect that it was "An amusing little film". Really helpful.

All the people I know who do judging - locally, regionally and for the IAC - devote a lot of time and effort not just to the judging itself, but also to writing the 'reports' afterwards (which, incidentally, is a very time consuming job often taking many more hours than just watching the films in the first place).

As for membership dropping - our club (OVFM) is putting on members - at all ages - and currently stands at over 70 I believe (usually about 40-50 at each meeting). But, sadly, interest in film making is changing from the organised to the impromptu, thanks to smart-phones and YouTube. It puzzles me that there isn't a single Video Magazine on the bookstalls, but if you want to read about cutting out paper or knitting socks, you have a variety of magazines to choose from. Why are video makers so unsupported?

Judge for yourself.

[Michael Slowe]

I have been reading this thread with ever increasing incredulity. If a film maker puts his work up to be judged, whether in competition or not, has no right whatsoever to complain about either the result (of competition) or the opinion expressed by a judge. Never, in all my years of entering competitions from 1964 to the present day, have I commented on a result or a written or spoken judgement concerning my own film.

The whole activity of film making and judging thereof is such a subjective matter and therefore open to many opinions as to the quality of a film - the same applies to art, music drama etc etc. Reading the crtitiques in the national press of film and drama you rarely get unanimity, even among the experts.

It seems to me that those who complain do so out of a feeling of disappointment and rejection of their work. Well, I'm sorry, but don't run this risk then. Dave is right in this and I agree with him. Obviously a judge should be sensitive to young film makers and not be downright unpleasant but they can't be expected to put wrong to right in a written ctritique. Their job is to place films in some kind of order (if in competition) and to express their opinion as to why it succeeds or fails in its object. Personally I prefer a frank, even blunt, opinion from a judge and have never found an unfavourable comment to be misplaced, nor have I resented such a comment.

Lee obviously felt for the youngsters and did not want them to be upset by what he felt were rude and unjust comments. Well Lee, you've seen a lot of films in your time, were the comments so unjustified? I really do think that we should all be less thin skinned as regards our work and not always expect nice kind flattering comments. As to constructive criticism, I find that can be worse than the destructive kind! I think that it is patronising for a judge to suggest how a film should have been made but I consider myself to be the best critic of my own work, surely, we all know in our hearts, how good or bad ones film really is?

[Mike Shaw]

D'accord!

My turn to buy the next drink Michael ... BIAFF?

[john ingham]

Wow!!! this is heavy

Michael... with the greatest respect sir... I don't agree with you... I have made a few short clips, and at the time i felt happy with them....I received some comments from other viewers who pointed things out...
I re-viewed the films and started to understand what others were actually seeing,

I re-made some of the films and could instantly see a massive improvement....

to me, the key to improve anyone, is encouragement.... and guidance..
why do you think there are not many youngsters in video clubs these days...they have Youtube...Vimeo...Facebook..etc etc just look at the shooters in the pub group..they sit down with a pint and talk films.... they are willing to take part in each others projects...the last thing they need is slamming down.....

if !!!!! the older generation do not make a move in changing their views there will be a split... clubs will be come non-existent or just full of old folk smelling of lavender balls talking about film equipment that no-one else cares about... i know that sounds harsh... but we do need to encourage youngsters..not slam them without and good advancing advice

[Michael Slowe]

John, you are missing my point. I'm completely with you that film makers should meet and view and discuss films. At a club, in the pub (good lubrication is essential to the creative process) and anywhere else. My point was that they shouldn't be upset when their work is criticised. I may have been misleading when I said that I don't want constructive suggestions. In a recent article in the IAC magazine I explain how I print rough cuts of a film and try and glean whether it is working by getting reactions from others. Sitting alone in an edit suite is not the best way to finalise a cut, you need some feedback and it's perfectly reasonable, even essential, to take heed of comments made. However, one assumes that if a film is entered into a festival or competition that process has already been completed and it is the finished article that is up for judgement. My point was that it is no good moaning about what judges do or do not say, their opinion is being sought after all and they are entitled to express it.

[Lee Prescott]

Hi Allz......

Judging is/has always been the "hot potato" has it not / is it not? Yes producers still enter but I wonder, apart from several that I call "politicised names", just how many in BIAFF (for instance)are repeat entrants as against "new" entrants? I am aware that from my address book of one thousand plus names many say they will no longer touch it for the reasons I mentioned in this current thread - and they are not Youngsters. That is so sad.

I want to repeat that this is not a "personality cult" - it IS entirely to do with what so many, or certain of 'em, write!

As to judging being "Subjective" to me that entrenched attitude is what engenders the problem where it often arises. Judging should be "Objective". (Check the different meanings in a good dictionary). My colleague Mike and I have very recently finished judging Objectively, (we wouldn't do it any other way), for a Comp. in Australia. It has now been reported that what we did was well received. If two "simple guys" like us can do it so can everyone else!

Where Mike Shaw states that his club has 70 members, (active film makers or just viewers (?), Wow: I for one hope it continues so. Must be an exception 'cos all reports indicate the opposite. - Yeah we were building nicely here, (Youngsters), effectively as a "Community Service" with our new "Unit"....Until...!
Now I am considering just packing it all in. Little point when the likes of 3 IAC "Daddy Knows Best" perform their Persian Carpet Trick on me/us!

'Bye...have a good Christmas and New Year - if these come!

Lee..