Results of Movie 2003 have been posted to the IAC website

A forum for sharing views on the art of film, video and AV sequence making as well as on competitions, judging and festivals.
Atta Chui

Results of Movie 2003 have been posted to the IAC website

Post by Atta Chui » Thu Mar 20, 2003 12:44 pm

Congratulation to All!

AN

Re: Results of Movie 2003 have been posted to the IAC websit

Post by AN » Thu Mar 20, 2003 2:55 pm

"Atta Chui" <forums@theiac.org.uk> wrote:
Congratulation to All!
But to whom? .......

....Where o where on IAC website? Clicking on 2003 results ONLY shows details
but not any results.

Albert...just questionable.

AN

Re: Results of Movie 2003 have been posted to the IAC websit

Post by AN » Thu Mar 20, 2003 3:21 pm

"Atta Chui" <forums@theiac.org.uk> wrote:
Congratulation to All!
Yes, to Ken and Michael for their 'double' golds!!
Well done lads.
Albert...

Dave Watterson

Hurrah - Atta,Alan and Andy have arrived!

Post by Dave Watterson » Sat Mar 22, 2003 11:00 am

On my holiday travels I can only log in at the occasional Internet cafe so
missed the actual debut day ... but well done to the new team for their first
public updates to the IAC website.

I love the enthusiasm, the info and details. You need to find a few new
end-of-page jokes, lads, but otherwise ... please keep it coming.

As Atta says I wanted to hand on the website to someone else, just as I had
it passed on to me from its founder, Mike Donlan. Each new webmaster brings
fresh thoughts, ideas and designs which all help to make the site interesting
and useful. After an awfully long silence the Magnificent Three came along
- and what's more there were several offers of occasional help from others,
including the folk who often contribute to this forum.

You will not be rid of me completely. I will be offering material to Atta
and co as well as having my say in this forum.

I'll add my congrats to all the IAC Competition winners announcedso far.
As part of the judging team this year (first stage) perhaps I ought not
comment at all, but I am realy glad Mark Jackson got a special award. His
films are not to everyone's taste but they are consistently fresh, challenging,
funny, technically excellent and disturbing ... if you don't know his work,
do try to see it.

Dave McTravelling Watterson

Micael Slowe

Re: Results of Movie 2003 have been posted to the IAC websit

Post by Micael Slowe » Sun Mar 23, 2003 5:09 pm

"AN" <Animation@btopenworld.com> wrote:
"Atta Chui" <forums@theiac.org.uk> wrote:

Congratulation to All!

Yes, to Ken and Michael for their 'double' golds!!
Well done lads.
Albert...
Thanks Albert but can't really be satisfied with Gold, Jonny Foreigner still
better than us it seems for the most part anyway, looking forward to seeing
their winners.

AN

Re: Results of Movie 2003 have been posted to the IAC websit

Post by AN » Sun Mar 23, 2003 8:43 pm

"Micael Slowe" <michael.slowe@btinternet.com> wrote:
Yes, to Ken and Michael for their 'double' golds!!
Well done lads.
Albert...

Thanks Albert but can't really be satisfied with Gold, Jonny Foreigner still
better than us it seems for the most part anyway, looking forward to seeing
their winners.
Well as I've said before, for me, it's getting an audience that really matters.
Gold and Silver gets one a mini cinema show on the Saturday with an audience
of about 50ish. But getting in the top prize winners gets one an audience
on the Sunday of
200-300.

Have just returned from the CEMRIAC festival in Derby and the audience there
was about 100! SO, one gets more bums on seats at
these regional festivals than getting a Gold or Silver in the big IAC show.
And for me, bums on seats is what I really adore!!

Your right about Johny though....and I bet he will show some real gritty,
thought provoking output as he normally does, and so deserve to beat all
of us brits into the ground.

Albert....well dug in.

Brian Hazelden

Re: Results of Movie 2003 have been posted to the IAC websit

Post by Brian Hazelden » Mon Mar 24, 2003 5:52 pm

Hi All,

One Brit movie and deserved winner of both IAC Gold and The Widescreen Award
is Pat Mahon and Robert Lethan's "Ripples in the Wind".

A serious piece of film-making!

Brian Hazelden
Your right about Johny though....and I bet he will show some real gritty,
thought provoking output as he normally does, and so deserve to beat all
of us brits into the ground.

Albert....well dug in.

AN

Re: Results of Movie 2003 have been posted to the IAC websit

Post by AN » Mon Mar 24, 2003 6:54 pm

"Brian Hazelden" <brian_hazelden@lineone.net> wrote:
Hi All,

One Brit movie and deserved winner of both IAC Gold and The Widescreen Award
is Pat Mahon and Robert Lethan's "Ripples in the Wind".

A serious piece of film-making!
That may be so, but unless a film gets either an International Medalian or
a special award such as 'Best Documentary', 'Best Actor' etc, then getting
gold only ensures that it will be seen on Saturday in a mini cinema, where
the audience is split 3 ways in each viewing cinema.

6 out 7 of the International Medalians were won by 'Johny Foreigner' as Michael
choose to describe them. It is these films that get the larger audience
on the Sunday, so gold/silver never gets you real BIG 'bums on seats', serious
film making or not withstanding, and blue/bronze gets you no bums at all!

On the other hand, a very mediocre film entered at a regional festival can
easily get 100 'bums on seats' as I witnessed yesterday.....there sure ain't
no justice in the film world!

Albert....justice of the piece(!)

Atta Chui

Re: Results of Movie 2003 have been posted to the IAC websit

Post by Atta Chui » Mon Mar 24, 2003 9:44 pm

don't forget to factor in the quality of the bums...


"AN" <AnimatioN@btopenworld.com> wrote:
On the other hand, a very mediocre film entered at a regional festival can
easily get 100 'bums on seats' as I witnessed yesterday.....there sure ain't
no justice in the film world!

Albert....justice of the piece(!)

AN

Re: Results of Movie 2003 have been posted to the IAC websit

Post by AN » Tue Mar 25, 2003 10:25 am

"Atta Chui" <webmaster@theiac.org.uk> wrote:
don't forget to factor in the quality of the bums...
Ah, you mean something like 3 stupid bums equals 1 intelligent bum? Do
some serious film makers consider that an audience which receives their own
film well is more intelligent than one that doesn't?

Albert....checking his IQ.
"AN" <AnimatioN@btopenworld.com> wrote:
On the other hand, a very mediocre film entered at a regional festival
can
easily get 100 'bums on seats' as I witnessed yesterday.....

Michael Slowe

Re: Results of Movie 2003 have been posted to the IAC websit

Post by Michael Slowe » Tue Mar 25, 2003 6:54 pm

"AN" <AnimatioN@btopenworld.com> wrote:
"Atta Chui" <webmaster@theiac.org.uk> wrote:

don't forget to factor in the quality of the bums...

Ah, you mean something like 3 stupid bums equals 1 intelligent bum? Do
some serious film makers consider that an audience which receives their
own
film well is more intelligent than one that doesn't?

Albert....checking his IQ.

"AN" <AnimatioN@btopenworld.com> wrote:
On the other hand, a very mediocre film entered at a regional festival
can
easily get 100 'bums on seats' as I witnessed yesterday.....
To answer your question Albert, quite the contrary I find but my films are
not as intellectual as yours!
As far as audience reaction goes I find that at the big festivals they are
viewing so many films that they get punch drunk and find it difficult to
identify one from the other. I get better response from an audience that
has requested a show and where I can discuss aspects of the productions and
answer questions.

AN

Re: Results of Movie 2003 have been posted to the IAC websit

Post by AN » Wed Mar 26, 2003 8:24 am

"Michael Slowe" <michael.slowe@btinternet.com> wrote:
To answer your question Albert, quite the contrary I find but my films are
not as intellectual as yours!
Oh come on Michael don't be so modest....I've never considered any of my
productions to be intellectual(whatever that means),
but simply little attempts to show folk how objects may come alive in their
own world...nothing more. I would consider that your own film, "Pelicans
of G" to be an intellectual film.....thank god you didn't use that thump
thump thump music.

You would have enjoyed films I saw last Sunday (3 hours worth!),
most got some so called suitable mood music, slapped on the wallpaper paste
and stuck it all the timeline!!
As far as audience reaction goes I find that at the big festivals they are
viewing so many films that they get punch drunk and find it difficult to
identify one from the other.
Toooooooo many overlong documentaries help with this. Last Sunday over half
the films were docs. Most so called docs made overseas are only tarted
up holiday films anyway. Film for a few days, get a few facts together,
slap it all on the timeline, add the wallpaper paste and Bobs yer uncle.

Alberrt....bobbing about.

Dave Watterson

Long, long movies

Post by Dave Watterson » Wed Mar 26, 2003 1:25 pm

I have long advocated a substantial fine for any commercial movie which lasts
longer than 90 minutes. There might be special exceptions for longer ones
where a panel of critics agreed the extra minutes were worth it.

In the amateur world many people rail against time limits - indeed IAC makes
a point of being one of the few competitions which accepts any length of
movie.

When assembling a collection of recent British amateur movies for screening
overseas I too restricted my choice to those under about 25 minutes in order
to include a good variety. This meant denying myself - and the audiences
- the pleasures of works by several of our great British moviemakers.

Maybe we should introduce a similar concept: a fine for every minute over
15 that any amateur movie runs, unless a panel of judges agrees the extra
minutes are worthwhile? Enter long movies in such competitions at your own
risk!

Dave McJet-Lagged Watterson

AN

Re: Long, long movies

Post by AN » Wed Mar 26, 2003 7:01 pm

"Dave Watterson" <back.at@the.ranch> wrote:
Maybe we should introduce a similar concept: a fine for every minute over
15 that any amateur movie runs,
15 too big.make that 8.......
..Fits in nicely with "having one over the 8" !
Albert...sober as a judge.

Michael Slowe

Re: Long, long movies

Post by Michael Slowe » Wed Mar 26, 2003 8:20 pm

"Dave Watterson" <back.at@the.ranch> wrote:
I have long advocated a substantial fine for any commercial movie which
lasts
longer than 90 minutes. There might be special exceptions for longer ones
where a panel of critics agreed the extra minutes were worth it.

In the amateur world many people rail against time limits - indeed IAC makes
a point of being one of the few competitions which accepts any length of
movie.

When assembling a collection of recent British amateur movies for screening
overseas I too restricted my choice to those under about 25 minutes in order
to include a good variety. This meant denying myself - and the audiences
- the pleasures of works by several of our great British moviemakers.

Maybe we should introduce a similar concept: a fine for every minute over
15 that any amateur movie runs, unless a panel of judges agrees the extra
minutes are worthwhile? Enter long movies in such competitions at your
own
risk!

Dave McJet-Lagged Watterson
Long films? I once sat through the full four hour version of Visconti"s "Mad
King Ludwig", one of my most fantastic movie experiences. Apart from the
short pee break one was able to get involved to such an extent that time
meant nothing. Italian film makers (the great ones) need the time to set
the whole thing up and not have to worry about some pig ignorant American
studio executive putting all sorts of restraints in the way.

As to overlong amateur productions I suppose it is up to judges to penalise
them in their grading if they think the length works against the quality.
I know from recent experience it is something one has to keep in mind the
whole time one is editing what could be considered an interesting subject.

Post Reply