IAC DISCUSSION FORUMS

WAITING FOR BIAFF RESULTS?

People always get impatient at this time of year. The films have been judged. The judges have (or should have) completed their crits for the films and sent them to the Competition Officer.

His task is to go through everything in detail and check, check, check. He chases up delinquent crit writers, ensures all is well.

He also has to prepare the screening timetables for BIAFF.

His plan is to contact the film makers in the week beginning the 16th March - though this may run a few days late.

A week later the results will be posted on the main IAC website.

So hold your breathe a little longer ...

Dave Watterson wrote:WAITING FOR BIAFF RESULTS?

...hold your breathe a little longer ...

<gasps for air in antici...pation!>

No need to hold your breath regarding results. I've never yet been wrong in my own assessment of my entry. This year I've entered a documentary "Passion in Kilburn" and it will get 4 Stars, there, you heard it here first! Mind you, I've never gone public on an assessment before and, you know, Sod's Law. Come on, let's hear your own forecasts, might be fun.

This could be an interesting annual event, Michael - guess your results!

I've entered a couple of music videos I made during last year, the audiences seem to like them but generally the judges don't, so I'm thinking 3-stars for one and 4-stars for the other, though I'm sort of hoping the better one of the two might do better!

Anyone else fancy a stab at this?

OK, two entries on which I worked -" Refuge from the Storm" (camera/edit) 3 stars. "Needs Must" (edit/sound) 4 stars, one I was associated with "The Wild Misadventures of Jesse James and Billy the Kid" 5 stars plus award for the longest title!!

ned c

I have entered a short ten minute band documentary called Moral Panic (Name of the band)
I Am being realistic and giving it a 4.
My entry last year got a 3 and I think this piece is better.

I'm hoping for three Diamonds. (Ha ha! That'll be the day!)

But I'll most likely get one 2 or 3-star, and two threes.

I'm not all that bothered really though - 'Enid' only got 4 last year, and wherever that is shown it gets a massive reception with buckets of praise: that's the real accolade for me, and audiences are the best judges IMO. (It won the audience vote Trophy at SERIAC, plus 3 other trophies - Best Film, Best Documentary, Best Editing).

I know BIAFF judges do their best (been there, worn the tee-shirt), but I think a mass audience is a better guide to a movie.
Which is why I like my films to be seen by an audience... you soon know when you've made a pup! And hence the reason to enter BIAFF.

The real prize will be if all three entries this year actually get shown ...

There was a t-shirt?!!

Looks like you missed out there, Dave

Nice one Dave!

I missed a nice t-shirt?!!!

... and a pie - did you not get a pie to eat??

Anticipating:
Three stars for a club film I directed/edited,
Three stars for a competent but not sparkling documentary
Three or four stars for another music/comedy/education depending on whether the judges dislike kids in videos (as one seemed to at a recent regional heat)

I was a first-round judge this year for the first time and thoroughly enjoyed the weekend! My experience was that none of the judges I worked with allowed any kind of personal prejudices or dislikes to creep in to the judgement, and it was as fair and honest a process as anyone could wish for. Any judge that would mark down a film just because he or she doesn't like to see children in films should never be allowed to be a judge again. I had two entries myself this year and am keeping my fingers crossed that whatever their star ratings may be, they'll both be shown at BIAFF. Last year I had a film shown for the first time on a Sunday, FACE/BOOK, but the showing was marred by the synch problem with the projection and also I'm convinced they used the spare DVD copy instead of the BluRay copy. See you all at BIAFF!

Howard-Smith wrote:none of the judges I worked with allowed any kind of personal prejudices or dislikes to creep in to the judgement

I'm sure all judges attempt this but some are more successful than others. It's easy to compare two films when one has the same emotional response to the subjects of each, but it becomes much more difficult if one provokes a strong reaction (for example, if I see a typical "Gangsta Rap" video, depicting misogyny, drugs and violence, whilst I might well be able to comment objectively on the camerawork, editing, lighting and the quality of audio reproduction, I think I'd struggle to be truly objective about the content or see it in a positive light.

Howard-Smith wrote: , and it was as fair and honest a process as anyone could wish for. Any judge that would mark down a film just because he or she doesn't like to see children in films should never be allowed to be a judge again.

To be fair, he didn't say he'd marked it down because of it, but the fact he mentioned it leaves you wondering ... Perhaps he took the view it was exploitative.

Howard-Smith wrote: Last year I had a film shown for the first time on a Sunday, FACE/BOOK, but the showing was marred by the synch problem with the projection and also I'm convinced they used the spare DVD copy instead of the BluRay copy

This seemed to affect all the films on the Sunday, some to a greater degree than others, but we've had that discussion. Knowing who's doing the Sunday show this year, I'm quietly confident it will be great presentation.