BIAFF 2008 - The Results

[ned c]

I understand how you feel Willy and I agree we must discuss our reactions. Our films are like our children and we have a hard time when they are criticised, particularly if we feel unfairly. I hope you enter your films into the AMPS festival, I am not a judge this year but will see the films at the Festival in California and when the DVDs are circulated. Without seeing them I don't know how relevant the judge's comments are.

In one of his writings Michael Slowe mentioned that he shows his films to a critical, non-amateur film making audience before they are released and he takes their comments seriously and makes changes. When we have labored over a film for months/years we have so much invested in it we cannot see it in a detached way and a fresh view is very valuable.

Regarding your discussion with one of the judges in my opinion a film maker must NEVER explain a film to a viewer. Either they "get it" or they don't. One of the reasons I enjoy David Lynch's films is that he never offers an explanation of very complex films (Mulholland Drive is my favorite).

just my two cents worth!

ned c

[Dave Watterson]

Ian said:

If you all did well then this thread would be as dead as a doodoo!

Is a "doodoo" the excrement of a "dodo" ? It's a wonderfully evocative expression.

As usual there is a lot of sense in what you say, Ian. Competitions and awards are not the real reason anyone sweats blood to make a movie.

I am not sure whether what we are reading here means people are less happy than usual with the results of the 2008 IAC competition, or whether they just feel more willing to share their views on the forum.

Dave

[Willy]

Willy said

"

Keep making films. You're good better than most of us. We always get disillusioned after a bad film. I do, and still am, but when the time is right, I`ll make another film. When you get kicked hard in the nuts. It takes along time for it to heal.

Stingman

Oh Ian, I am not disillusioned at all. I was just joking. The discussion on this forum must be serious, but from time to time we must "pepper" it with some British humour. For me it's a bit more difficult as I feel the odd man out.

The Festival was quite a succes. I'm sure about it. A maximum of films. And ... up to now, after 8 votes, it seems that most filmmakers are happy with the results. Me too. In fact I'm allowed to vote four times as I had 4 films. I will add an other 3 yes votes to the poll. I only think it is not bad to have a discussion about judges' comments, about the system, about stars and other things.

Paul Bagshaw, Mersey Ten winner won twice 4 stars !
One anecdote ... Geoff Harrison and his friends can confirm this.
Some weeks ago I was the only judge at the Mersey Ten Competition, but as you know I also asked the members of my clubs to watch the films. In Preston I was asked to give the results. I thought that they would throw rotten eggs and soft tomatoes at me. That's something you must accept when you are a judge. The audience were very calm when they heard the verdict, but the North West Chairman David Mardon said in his closing remarks that he didn't agree with my choice. That night I even slept better than before. You must always be hard enough to accept blows when you are a judge. After David's speech many people said I was right. That was a relief. Now I have seen that Paul Bagshaw, the Mersey Ten winner, won twice 4 stars at BIAFF. I am very happy with this, because it proves that the Mersey Ten winner is someone who makes excellent films with power and emotion.

AMPS Film Festival
Of course I will take part in the AMPS Festival, Ned, and I hope that many other friends will do this, and yes also friends with fantastic films. Having competitors always creates some challenge. It stimulates me to make better films. Competition is very positive. Rivalry is negative. Rivalry is an epidemic in Belgium and I sometimes get sick of it. Pity that I can't tell you everything. Sometimes we must try to control ourselves.

I have asked the youngest member of my club, Samuel Faict, to be one of my competitors in the AMPS Festival, Ned ! The first thing I did after having read the BIAFF-results is congratulating Tim Verschaeren. He got 5 stars. More than me. I subitled his film and I am very happy with his results. Of course I don't forget all the things that Dave Watterson has done to stimulate Belgians by subitling films and maybe also filmmakers of other nationalities to take part in BIAFF. I know that BIAFF is international thanks to Dave and other prominent IAC-friends.

[Geoff]

I can indeed confirm Willys remarks regarding the Mersey Ten competition, and the comments of the North West Chairman, David Marden.

Quite frankly, most people in the room were staggered to hear this, and the general feeling was that Willys choices for the four placed films was absolutely correct. A wonderful choice we thought. In addition, I would like to add that Willy produced a detailed report for all the 26 films entered in the competition, regardless of whether the film was shown or not shown. Receiving such a report came as a very pleasant surprise to many of the entrants. Willys reports are always detailed and positive, encouraging the film maker to try again in the future. We look forward to seeing Willy again in Lancashire in the future.

I and my fellow film maker, Wayne Avanson are delighted that we achieved a result of 4 Stars for our film, "Thy Fair Imperfect Shade". It is the first project that we have done together, and of course we are delighted at the result. We also received some odd comments from judges, but nevertheless these must be taken on board and digested. It is perhaps a difficult film to understand, and certainley required a lot of work to make the story work as a film. All in all we are delighted, and hope that it will be enjoyed.

Geoff Harrison.

[Dave Watterson]

Just a word of warning about all this ...

It is quite likely that some people who are not happy with their result will not be willing to say so in public. It sounds like being a poor sport. This means we cannot assume that the poll or the comments here represent every view.

I am sure our competition officer will have plenty of examples like this but in my own emails in the last couple of days I have been told:

"x was really over the moon about the result of his film, first when he heard from me that he had won a four star award (I found that on the internet), but even more when he received the post today where he found that his film will be shown in the Sunday programme (even though he had "only" won a four star award)."

"I got the judges' comments - wow, that makes us really happy"

"We are still trying to let the news sink in. The IAC and this competition means so much to us and we feel very honoured that our film has been so well received."

There have also been some on the lines of "I was shocked..." "It was disappointing ..."

Dave

[fraught]

This thread has been a cracking good read, and i want to thank everyone for taking the time to watch ABC and give me their constructive criticism. I've certainly learnt a few things here... and that is great!

It would definately appear that i was obviously too close to my subject to see the bigger picture (which is why i've been a bit P***ed off).

Standing back from it all... i think the one thing that has made me angry the most is the reference to some of my shots as "common in beginner's films". Every shot in ABC lasts as long as i wanted it to, and appears as i wanted it to. I know 1 or 2 shots look like they are filming the floor, but it was intentional and for effect. I'm not new to this filming game either... but i've certainly felt like it this weekend!

Anyway... onwards and upwards! I'm in pre-production of my new film at the moment (have been for about 2 months now) and i finally start shooting on Wednesday! I can't wait!

[Jespian]

I am one of the people who has emailed Dave to say how happy we were with the result. I made a film with my wife, Anna, called An Amateur Auteur, which is about my dad, who was an IAC member from the 'seventies until his death in 1991. We won a Diamond and the Best British trophy. It's a great honour, especially as it is something that he always dreamed of. We didn't expect the film to do as well as it did. Thank you!

[Willy]

Just a word of warning about all this ...

It is quite likely that some people who are not happy with their result will not be willing to say so in public. It sounds like being a poor sport. This means we cannot assume that the poll or the comments here represent every view.


Dave

Reports Belgian Filmmakers
Therefore it is interesting to know what kind of reports all the other Belgian filmmakers have received. Julien Verheyen won four stars with "The Way Forward". He was helped by Douglas Boswell, one of our young members who has become a professional filmmaker now. Julien is over the moon about his results and comments. I've read them. They were very positive. Julien has already decided to frame his certificate. He will also take part next year and also in the Guernsey Festival.

Synopisis seems to be important, though ...The youngest member of my club, Samuel Faict, however, was not so pleased. A lot of friends have already seen his horror film "Valentine". The judges told him that they didn't understand the story and that maybe they were a bit misled by the synopsis. I had written the synopsis. That's why I feel responsible and guilty. We must also admit that young Samuel's film is still very difficult to understand even when you have seen it several times. Ned told us that we don't have to explain the meaning of our films. It's better that the audience and judges see it without being informed about the contents. They should be able to "absord" the feelings that we want to radiate in their hearts, but only when showing our film without giving any introductory explanation or remarks. I hope that I have said this now in the right way.

High speed
There is one very important thing that is to the credit of all BIAFF judges. About 250 had to be watched ! Sometimes at breakneck speed ! That's what Werner Van den Bulck told me. He enjoyed it very very much but he was surprised that many films were projected at high speed. He himself didn't have to see so many films. Some colleagues had to watch more films. What does it all mean ? That we have to praise all our friends who have shown their willingness to judge the films. I also know that it is not easy to find judges.

Mersey and Guernsey
Judging the films for the Mersey Ten Competition was different of course. I could watch them at home and in my clubs. I watched them maybe 6 or 7 times and I had enough time to write the reports. I guess a similar system is used in the Guernsey festival. Every year I receive very impressive and encouraging reports. Dave is one of these experts. Maybe he gets enough time in Guernsey (or at home ?) to analyse the films. By the way : 31st May is the deadline for the Guernsey Film Festival. I still have to work on one film for the most friendly festival in the world. "Stop writing now, Willy and go on editing the films you still have to finish ! " Sorry, friends, that was my alter ego.

[stingman]

Discussing about the judges HAVE to know where a story is going........

I my opinion (which is probably rubbish anyway ) they don`t

Look at the film `2001`! A great film for it`s time, but totally bonkers and it has a dodgy end that I didn`t get. This film would have got ONE Star if the judges got their way!

But when I watch a film on TV or the Cinema, I feel it must have an end or a way to a sequel! If it doesn`t, then I feel that i`ve waisted my time in watching it or that I have been swindled out of my money or 2 hours out of my life. I feel let down by the film and want to smash up the nearest thing!

So Yes, a film doesn`t really have to be understood but it goes down better if it is!

Be good all.

(cracking thread!)

Stingman

[fraught]

I think this is where i differ... i love those films that are open ended, or dark and twisted. The endings that keep you guessing wanting more!

I love the ending to films like The Thing, Prince of Darkness, and Arlington Road... that's my bag...

[Peter Copestake]

I'm interested in the comments about the synopsis. We are usually asked to supply one and I gather the judges see it but the audience often doesn't, perhaps to save printing/paper.
My wife and I never go to the cinema and only see films on TV so we always have some sort of synopsis so know what we are going to watch but it is up to us whether we like what we see. I think for competitions the synopsis and the title are important. I have made mistakes about this in the recent past. I titled a film 'Oddies 100 years' because it was the firm's centenary . At least one judge was disappointed that she didn't see more of the history but it was intended to be about how it had survived 100 years into the present day by being smart in the balance between machines and humans.
Personally, I think, if I have found the film interesting, I have forgotten it's title after a few minutes and only think about the Radio Times synopsis if I think the writer hasn't understood, or even watched, the film/programme. Sorry this is going on a bit, but is there a difference between a documentary film and a doc. programme? The only difference I can see is that a film will not generally have a presenter on screen.

[ned c]

Here is a short synopsis of one of my favorite films, it is enough to get my interest but offers no analysis, criticism or comment on the film.

“Mulholland Drive. Director David Lynch weaves another complex, mysterious tale in this story about a woman (Laura Elena Harring) left stranded on Mulholland Drive with amnesia. Alone and afraid, she is taken in by Betty (Naomi Watts), who has just arrived in Hollywood to pursue her dreams. Gradually, the two women start to put the pieces of the puzzle together... a puzzle that unravels a dark, sinister plot.”

For an explanation of what Mulholland Drive is about the viewer must do some heavy duty thinking, the plot is complex, the timeline is not linear and there is uncertainty about how much is real and how much is imagined by the protagonists. This film is also the subject of much discussion on the internet where explanations abound. David Lynch offered some completely distracting clues to an interpretation but I suspect this was more to put people off than inform them.

Interpretation of films is best left to judges, critics and individuals, the film maker should let them decide what they see in the film.

One of the problems n-c film makers face is getting to see n-c films. YouTube is a great asset but the picture quality and size are a serious limitation. If you join AMPS we circulate the winning films on DVD for serious home/club viewing. As I write a set of AMPS DVDs are somewhere in the UK being viewed and enjoyed. Discussing films is fine but without seeing them as the maker intended it is very difficult to make an informed comment. I feel that membership of a movie making organization should include free access to a film library.

Ned C

[Dave Watterson]

For IAC judging the synopsis is kept by the Competition Manager but judging teams may ask for it if they wish. The Cotswold Final Judging works in a similar way - synopses are read on request.

It can sometimes be useful with films in a foreign language where judges may get the gist of it through image and soundtrack but lack the fine detail given in dialogue.

The synopsis is sometimes included in printed programmes for the screenings. I think this is a mistake. In my mind a synopsis is as accurate a summary as you can make of what happens in the film. What goes into a programme or other promotional material is different and should certainly not reveal all the details.

What Ned quoted about the Lynch film seems to be to be just such a programme note.

Cheers

Dave

[Willy]

In one of my previous messages I said that I would vote 4 times 'yes' because I had 4 films, but it seems that we can only vote once.

[stingman]

I even voted! I like voting and like the Elections! I didn`t have a film in the comp. I voted because I was happy with my result. No stars!

Stingman