IAC DISCUSSION FORUMS

hobby documentaries.

What are these, Dave? Do you mean documentaries about hobbyists?
We make serious documentaries to the best of our abilities about real people doing real things.

maybe we ought to weight or categorise the competitions according to how many years their creator has been making films?
Can there be a limit on this? My abilities are declining now!

Surely there has to be a limit on what professionals one uses. I have used a 'resting' (for years) actor for voice overs. Of course I don't pay her but I certainly direct her. I'd rather use my own voice if it were not so dull. ('Tired' a judge called it last time I tried!)
Could I, if I had the contacts, direct a camera person, an editor, a sound recordist, to make one of our documentaries and call it 'my film'?
If a very short film we made, for a charity, helps to get them a very large sum of money from one of the lottery funds is that not of 'commercial' value?
If we can't call ourselves 'amateurs' can we avoid 'non-...' somehow? It's so negative.

Sorry, Peter, I should have made myself clearer ... I had in mind films about those hobbies and interests that we have in addition to film making ... and thus implied relatively small, personal projects.

Dave

Peter makes a lot of very salient points. It all boils down to the fact that judging is incredibly subjective, even with very experienced judges (they're probably looking for 'professionalism' in the films).

Take the 'awards' given at some festivals these days - based on an audience vote for the 'film they found the most entertaining'. Having been involved in one or two of those, the results can be quite enlightening: for example, the winner may get about 10% of the votes - the other films (about 30 say), get a few votes each, if any. Maybe there is a 'he's from our club' element to the voting - who knows.

In some ways, it is a real shame that our films have to face judgement - because it is so subjective. On the other hand, it is good to get constructive critiques so that one can progress up the scale. Then again, some people seem to be able to make a good film at the drop of a hat - they have an 'eye' for it. Others struggle and seem for ever to be on the learning curve.

Sports enthusiasts - amateur athletes - have it 'easy': no such judgemental decisions. They win, or they don't. Even the judges at boxing matches are counting the hits, not the finesse or grace of the right swing.

The thing is a film with errors of angle, focus, colour matching and so on can still be more entertaining and captivating than another properly made piece exhibiting all the film-making skills - but which lacks creative flair.

And we do it for fun.

Right, Dave, and others, but will you agree that there is no film NOT worth making?
It may only be for practice but it is somebody's work and is worth doing and getting a judge's comment, on whether or not it is well made. It should not matter that the subject doesn't interest us personally. (If the subject does interest the judge but the film doesn't because of its poor quality, that's another matter.)

And - "these are not our sort of films". In our club (Pendle) this sort of comment is only made after seeing BIAFF award-winning drama films on thoroughly unpleasant subjects - people with apparently evil minds who commit violence and murder. (We are usually very tolerant. We once watched, for what seemed like 20 minutes or more, a "film" acquired by our caretaker, not a member, of the inside of a corroded water-main taken from a probe!)