There is an interesting piece by Peter Dobing on the IAC general explaining
how two subjects were regarded as unacceptable for amateur competition. Perhaps
this is why Mainland Europeans and Americans get more controversial subjects
shown. Is there a sort of unofficial censorship in British amateur competitions?
Many years ago, about 1973 I think, Stuart Rumens made a film (I shot if
for him) with the subject of infidelity and rape. Positively mild by present
day standards but we were asked not to show it on a number of occasions as
"children may be present". Is this why the amateur film scene in the UK produces
such bland films? Perhaps the definition of Amateur in the UK is "nothimg
untoward chaps"?
Ned C
Controversial subjects
-
AN
Re: Controversial subjects
"Ned C" <forums@theiac.org.uk> wrote:
did the film, "Kevin, a life" get into the IAC winners last year, Ned? Maybe
you didn't see it.
No, the reason that the british amateur produces, in the main, bland films
goes much deeper...into our very psychie. I have suggested it is because,
"You've never had it/having it so good" We have never suffered as those on
the continent of Europe have done. It's an interesting puzzle...maybe we
are too sports mad over here and it dulls the senses?...well it does mine
if I see any.
Albert....a real sport.
I don't think there is any unofficial censorship, because if there was, howThere is an interesting piece by Peter Dobing on the IAC general explaining
how two subjects were regarded as unacceptable for amateur competition.
Perhaps
this is why Mainland Europeans and Americans get more controversial subjects
shown. Is there a sort of unofficial censorship in British amateur competitions?
Many years ago, about 1973 I think, Stuart Rumens made a film (I shot if
for him) with the subject of infidelity and rape. Positively mild by present
day standards but we were asked not to show it on a number of occasions
as
"children may be present". Is this why the amateur film scene in the UK
produces
such bland films? Perhaps the definition of Amateur in the UK is "nothimg
untoward chaps"?
did the film, "Kevin, a life" get into the IAC winners last year, Ned? Maybe
you didn't see it.
No, the reason that the british amateur produces, in the main, bland films
goes much deeper...into our very psychie. I have suggested it is because,
"You've never had it/having it so good" We have never suffered as those on
the continent of Europe have done. It's an interesting puzzle...maybe we
are too sports mad over here and it dulls the senses?...well it does mine
if I see any.
Albert....a real sport.
-
Atta Chui
Re: Controversial subjects
So all of us are allowed to enter "PG" Cert movies only? (forget what the
equivalent is called in US)
I don't understand why movies with more adventurous themes are not "allowed
in competitions". When it comes to showing, we can arrange those films to
be screened near intermission time, so that family with kids may just leave
for coffee sooner, etc. There must be simple ways to accomandate this.
By the way, those films won't have much chances in the competition anyway
- you can change the rules, you can't change the judges' taste :->
Atta Chui
equivalent is called in US)
I don't understand why movies with more adventurous themes are not "allowed
in competitions". When it comes to showing, we can arrange those films to
be screened near intermission time, so that family with kids may just leave
for coffee sooner, etc. There must be simple ways to accomandate this.
By the way, those films won't have much chances in the competition anyway
- you can change the rules, you can't change the judges' taste :->
Atta Chui
-
Dave Watterson
Re: Controversial subjects
I think we are once again looking at the difference between those for whom
movie-making is a hobby and those for whom it is an attempt at creating art.
Both are important to IAC.
There ARE a lot of middle-of-the-road, middle-class people who prefer not
to hear swearing, see nudity or violence. Some of those do not want to be
challenged by any movie they see: whether to think or feel. They look for
what the other group of us might call bland entertainment.
There are many of us with a more adventurous spirit.
That's fine except when either group wants to impose its views on the other.
So far as I know the only formal restriction on entries in most UK competitions
is that they should not break the law. Most organisers reserve the right
not to screen entries which they think might upset their audience. (I don't
mind that so long as it does not prevent them giving such a film whatever
award it deserves.)
It IS difficult. Tastes are changing.
My own belief is that any topic can make a great movie, depending how it
is done. (Undertaking can be comedy in TV's 'Six Feet Under', watch out
for unusual loving in the new movie 'Secretary' opening in UK soon.)
For my own part - with a background in the film society world where generally
people expect to be challenged by movies - I do not shy away from any subjects.
I don't like some tv shows/movies that are very popular ('Dad's Army', 'Blade')
but that does not prevent me appreciating their qualities.
I do go out of my way, however, to avoid what are often called "club comedies"
- the sort of thing which is often seen at IAC's Mermaid competition. My
main objection to them is that they are lazy, they depend on stereotypes
and far too much suspension of disbelief by the audience. They are the movie
equivalent of the bloke in the pub who describes a joke rather than performing
it.
Does that make any sense?
Dave McDoubtful
movie-making is a hobby and those for whom it is an attempt at creating art.
Both are important to IAC.
There ARE a lot of middle-of-the-road, middle-class people who prefer not
to hear swearing, see nudity or violence. Some of those do not want to be
challenged by any movie they see: whether to think or feel. They look for
what the other group of us might call bland entertainment.
There are many of us with a more adventurous spirit.
That's fine except when either group wants to impose its views on the other.
So far as I know the only formal restriction on entries in most UK competitions
is that they should not break the law. Most organisers reserve the right
not to screen entries which they think might upset their audience. (I don't
mind that so long as it does not prevent them giving such a film whatever
award it deserves.)
It IS difficult. Tastes are changing.
My own belief is that any topic can make a great movie, depending how it
is done. (Undertaking can be comedy in TV's 'Six Feet Under', watch out
for unusual loving in the new movie 'Secretary' opening in UK soon.)
For my own part - with a background in the film society world where generally
people expect to be challenged by movies - I do not shy away from any subjects.
I don't like some tv shows/movies that are very popular ('Dad's Army', 'Blade')
but that does not prevent me appreciating their qualities.
I do go out of my way, however, to avoid what are often called "club comedies"
- the sort of thing which is often seen at IAC's Mermaid competition. My
main objection to them is that they are lazy, they depend on stereotypes
and far too much suspension of disbelief by the audience. They are the movie
equivalent of the bloke in the pub who describes a joke rather than performing
it.
Does that make any sense?
Dave McDoubtful
-
Ned C
Re: Controversial subjects
"AN" <AnimatioN@btopenworld.com> wrote:
on controversial subjects are made in the UK but do not make it into the
realms of the IAC. This has nothing to do with whether we have suffered as
much as the mainland colleagues. It has a lot to do with the nature of the
IAC and video/cine clubs which represent a sector of society that share a
particular set of values and if your values are radically different then
this is not congenial to make and show films that will be badly received
because of their content.
Sports madness is universal, a poor excuse,
Ned C
>
No I have not seen it but would like to.I don't think there is any unofficial censorship, because if there was,
how
did the film, "Kevin, a life" get into the IAC winners last year, Ned?
Maybe
you didn't see it.
I disagree with your reasoning because I believe a lot of self financed filmsNo, the reason that the british amateur produces, in the main, bland films
goes much deeper...into our very psychie. I have suggested it is because,
"You've never had it/having it so good" We have never suffered as those
on
the continent of Europe have done. It's an interesting puzzle...maybe we
are too sports mad over here and it dulls the senses?...well it does mine
if I see any.
Albert....a real sport.
on controversial subjects are made in the UK but do not make it into the
realms of the IAC. This has nothing to do with whether we have suffered as
much as the mainland colleagues. It has a lot to do with the nature of the
IAC and video/cine clubs which represent a sector of society that share a
particular set of values and if your values are radically different then
this is not congenial to make and show films that will be badly received
because of their content.
Sports madness is universal, a poor excuse,
Ned C
>
-
Atta Chui
Re: Controversial subjects
I agree with Ned that it is not that UK filmmakers do not make films on controversial
subjects, it is however that those films never make their ways into IAC.
On the one hand, these films are not likely to be accepted by the majority
of IAC members (who represent a small subset of our society); on the other
hands, why would those non-IAC filmmakers care...
This is also why young filmmakers staying away from IAC, no?
Atta
subjects, it is however that those films never make their ways into IAC.
On the one hand, these films are not likely to be accepted by the majority
of IAC members (who represent a small subset of our society); on the other
hands, why would those non-IAC filmmakers care...
This is also why young filmmakers staying away from IAC, no?
Atta
-
Michael Slowe
Re: Controversial subjects
"Atta Chui" <iac.web@ntlworld.com> wrote:
It is the craft, technical skill and imagination employed in the productions
that is the main problem. Merely choosing a controversial subject is not
the answer and I doubt whether any young film makers are deterred by the
fear that their film might not be welcome.
If the film is good enough I am sure that it would be welcomed and indeed
lauded by the IAC "establishment".
I agree that most of our films are not ambitious enough but imaginatively
made, a film of a lone prisoner sitting in a cell, would not bore.
Of course we should court the youngsters, but encouraging sordid vulgarity,
sex, drugs, nudity and bad language, whilst acceptable in the right context,
does not always result in a good film!
I really do not agree that the subjects of films are in any way a problem.I agree with Ned that it is not that UK filmmakers do not make films on
controversial
subjects, it is however that those films never make their ways into IAC.
On the one hand, these films are not likely to be accepted by the majority
of IAC members (who represent a small subset of our society); on the other
hands, why would those non-IAC filmmakers care...
This is also why young filmmakers staying away from IAC, no?
Atta
It is the craft, technical skill and imagination employed in the productions
that is the main problem. Merely choosing a controversial subject is not
the answer and I doubt whether any young film makers are deterred by the
fear that their film might not be welcome.
If the film is good enough I am sure that it would be welcomed and indeed
lauded by the IAC "establishment".
I agree that most of our films are not ambitious enough but imaginatively
made, a film of a lone prisoner sitting in a cell, would not bore.
Of course we should court the youngsters, but encouraging sordid vulgarity,
sex, drugs, nudity and bad language, whilst acceptable in the right context,
does not always result in a good film!
-
Atta Chui
Re: Controversial subjects
I am not trying to encourage everyone to make films on controversial subjects.
In the extreme case, some directors choose a controversial subject just for
the sake of it. when you see these not-very-well-made films, you see the
director shows no real appreciation to the subject. These are bad films.
Our discussion, however, does kick me and make me think about the IAC ageing
problem again.
I think younger filmmakers are not attracted to IAC because they don't think
their films will find the right audience here. At least they feel they can't.
And when they go to a festival and see that 95% of audience is 40+, they
feel they are outsiders.
We know we are better than what these young people think (just see how many
positive thinkers we have on this forum). However, generation gap does exist.
The barrier is high until young members at IAC grow beyond some critical
mass. So this is a catch 22 situation.
Atta Chui
PS. I once told a professor at my university about my upcoming film. It's
not even anything controversal - it's just a typical twenty-something author's
view point on "i don't know what i am doing in this fast moving world", that
type of thing.
The professor just stared at me. No comments.
In the extreme case, some directors choose a controversial subject just for
the sake of it. when you see these not-very-well-made films, you see the
director shows no real appreciation to the subject. These are bad films.
Our discussion, however, does kick me and make me think about the IAC ageing
problem again.
I think younger filmmakers are not attracted to IAC because they don't think
their films will find the right audience here. At least they feel they can't.
And when they go to a festival and see that 95% of audience is 40+, they
feel they are outsiders.
We know we are better than what these young people think (just see how many
positive thinkers we have on this forum). However, generation gap does exist.
The barrier is high until young members at IAC grow beyond some critical
mass. So this is a catch 22 situation.
Atta Chui
PS. I once told a professor at my university about my upcoming film. It's
not even anything controversal - it's just a typical twenty-something author's
view point on "i don't know what i am doing in this fast moving world", that
type of thing.
The professor just stared at me. No comments.
-
AN
Re: Controversial subjects
"Michael Slowe" <michael.slowe@btinternet.com> wrote:
One of those long
slow motion shots as the key flies thro' the air.
younger, the controls on their camera getting smaller and more fiddly to
use, and may find that Grecian 2000 an attractive buy. Then they will join
the IAC and moan about them not courting the youngsters. The world goes
on. IAC was exactly the same 50 years or more ago, so don't worry about
youngsters, their turn will come.
Albert...turning over.
You could show the jailer throwing away the key!I agree that most of our films are not ambitious enough but imaginatively
made, a film of a lone prisoner sitting in a cell, would not bore.
One of those longslow motion shots as the key flies thro' the air.
Why? One day youngsters will find the stairs getting steeper,policemen gettingOf course we should court the youngsters,
younger, the controls on their camera getting smaller and more fiddly to
use, and may find that Grecian 2000 an attractive buy. Then they will join
the IAC and moan about them not courting the youngsters. The world goes
on. IAC was exactly the same 50 years or more ago, so don't worry about
youngsters, their turn will come.
Albert...turning over.
-
Michael Slowe
Re: Controversial subjects
"AN" <AnimatioN@btopenworld.com> wrote:
in saying this.
What a wise chap our Albert is, and I am not being sarcastic"Michael Slowe" <michael.slowe@btinternet.com> wrote:
I agree that most of our films are not ambitious enough but imaginatively
made, a film of a lone prisoner sitting in a cell, would not bore.
You could show the jailer throwing away the key!
slow motion shots as the key flies thro' the air.
Of course we should court the youngsters,
Why? One day youngsters will find the stairs getting steeper,policemen
getting
younger, the controls on their camera getting smaller and more fiddly to
use, and may find that Grecian 2000 an attractive buy. Then they will join
the IAC and moan about them not courting the youngsters. The world goes
on. IAC was exactly the same 50 years or more ago, so don't worry about
youngsters, their turn will come.
Albert...turning over.
in saying this.
-
AN
Re: Controversial subjects
"Michael Slowe" <michael.slowe@btinternet.com> wrote:
Gold, Frankincense or Myrrh(th!!)?
Albert....following a film star.
Wot shall I send you Michael,What a wise chap our Albert is,
Gold, Frankincense or Myrrh(th!!)?
Albert....following a film star.