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.
AN

Re: Long, long movies

Post by AN » Thu Mar 27, 2003 1:51 pm

"Michael Slowe" <michael.slowe@btinternet.com> wrote:
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.
Careful Michael, you may put some very nasty ideas into some amateur film
makers minds with tape being so cheap....Oh save us from the 4 hour amateur
movie! Can you imagine it? It doesn't bear thinking about.
Oh, save us too from many of 'em which run over 8 minutes even.

Albert...asleep in the ninepennies.

Ned C

Re: Long, long movies

Post by Ned C » Fri Mar 28, 2003 3:31 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.

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
Did you see Little Dorrit? I did. all 6 hours if I remember correctly - we
did go out for dinner between the two parts, it was very good. As I have
heard said its not the length its what you do with it that matters a well
made 6 hour film filled with attention getting events is much to be preferred
to 15 minutes of poorly made rubbish. Get a good night's sleep Dave, you'll
feel better,

Ned C

atta chui

Re: Long, long movies

Post by atta chui » Sat Mar 29, 2003 4:14 pm

Your film itself should tell you how long it needs. Some nice simple ideas
just can't be stretched to anything longer than a 5, but if you have a character
oriented story than it probably can't be compressed to anything shorter than
20.

If a film festival only take anything less than 10 say, we would be seeing
only a subset of films always...

anyone can make a 4-hour film if s/he wants. the judge has a remote control
in his/her hand and can stop the tape any time if the film is not sustainable.

it is fair.

atta chui

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

Post by atta chui » Sat Mar 29, 2003 4:24 pm

No, it is not a matter of IQ here. We don't use IQ to read a film. But sometimes
I just know my film is not going to work with a class of audience. At university
we can get an audience between 100 & 200 easily. I love to show films there,
not just for the sheer quantity of bums, but they are also our intened audience.



"AN" <AnimatioN@btopenworld.com> wrote:
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?

AN

Re: Long, long movies

Post by AN » Sat Mar 29, 2003 7:18 pm

"atta chui" <atta@cmw2000.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
anyone can make a 4-hour film if s/he wants. the judge has a remote control
in his/her hand and can stop the tape any time if the film is not sustainable.
The judge would be asleep after max 25 minutes if it were an amateur British
film. (that remark ought to wake someone up at the back there.)

Albert...zzzzzzzzzZZZZ

Dave Watterson

Re: Long, long movies

Post by Dave Watterson » Sat Mar 29, 2003 9:58 pm

[Warning: just clicking the reply button and not editing the Subject line
can make it a bit confusing for people to follow the thread of any discussion
we are having.]

As many of you have mentioned there are exceptional cases where long commercial
films are fine. But I maintain they are exceptions. Most Hollywood movies
outstay their welcome after 90 minutes.

On the amateur front: the longest I have watched was nearly three hours -
and impressive labour but not a great movie. The IAc International usually
has a few with a running time of over 50 minutes. People determined enough
to make them and brave enough to enter them in such a competition usually
do a decent job. The result, however, is usually a little tedious.

Again I make an exception for Mark Jackson's work ...

[By the way, talking of marathon efforts, Mal sent me a DVD version of the
compilation progarmme for German countries, complete with a menu page showing
ugly-mug Watterson while something suspiciously like "Deutschland, Deutschland
uber alles..." was being played on the soundtrack. I sent him back a jar
of Marmite, hence the messy sandwiches. Just thought the rest of you might
like to know what that is all about !]

McDave

atta chui

Re: Long, long movies

Post by atta chui » Sun Mar 30, 2003 12:45 am

Oh, by the way, responding to Dave's originally message. Raindance UK has
such concept: their entry fee is one pound per minute of your film a couple
of years ago. Not sure what the latest rule is...

Atta

AN

Re: Long, long movies

Post by AN » Sun Mar 30, 2003 8:54 am

"atta chui" <atta@cmw2000.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
Oh, by the way, responding to Dave's originally message. Raindance UK has
such concept: their entry fee is one pound per minute of your film a couple
of years ago. Not sure what the latest rule is...
Oh, what a great idea except the charge should be exponential...
1 pound for 1 minute. 5 pounds for 2. 25 pounds for 3.
500 pounds for 15. 10,000 for 30 !!

Albert....getting expensive.

Post Reply