BIAFF 2024 - yes or no?

[Howard-Smith]

You outline a neat and straightforward system, Dave. I’d be in favour of this. Let’s face it, each year there seem to be lots of filmmakers who are disappointed with their star ratings. We know that 3 Stars is meant to be an indication of a ‘good’ film but there’s a widespread feeling that 3 Stars isn’t good enough, that it’s a sign of underachievement. Yes, why not bring back Blue, Silver, Gold, and still retain the Diamonds and all the Special Awards.
This system was dumped in 2008, I believe, because an overseas filmmaker journeyed to BIAFF under the misapprehension that ‘Gold’ was a 1st place winner or Silver was a 2nd place winner or something like that, and he was bitterly disappointed to find his film wasn’t even being shown. If this system was revived, surely a clear explanation of the awards and what they mean should make a recurrence of this unlikely.
Does anyone else agree that it might be a good time to replace the Star system?

[TimStannard]

Yes, why not bring back Blue, Silver, Gold, and still retain the Diamonds and all the Special Awards.

Because, in no time at all, there will be people who begin to see "Silver" as "just" a silver. And there will be a lot of people whose films currently receive three stars that will become blue and be "lumped in" with our current one and two stars.
I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the system, just that it will receive the same criticism.

I do not like the idea of a 10 star system. There is much more scope for both individual judges and panels to argue over the difference between one star and likeise for people to disagree by a margin of many stars.

[fraught]

I was unable to make BIAFF (again!) this year. It always seems to clash with a Goalball Tournament, and as the coach... my team needs me.

I'd be very interested to hear anyone's thoughts on my film 'The Little Ones' that was screened on Friday night. I'm just making some final tweeks to it, so all feedback is good feedback.

[Michael Slowe]

Tim, I totally agree with you, the current star system works well enough and tinkering with it would create even more problems than we we seem to have already. I really cannot understand this obsession with ratings. As we all seem to agree and frequently repeat, film viewing is subjective and rarely do two people agree on the effect a given film has on them. Some people (not mentioning you Howard!) get too tied up on the ratings given to their films, also Willy comes into that category. Judges obviously do their best but they are, generally, film makers themselves and tend to sub consciously compare the film with their own aims. People from the professional world would be preferable but would they be prepared to give up so much time to do it?

Tim, I enjoyed sitting with you in the audience over this weekend. We do have a similar approach to film making but still didn't always agree with each other's opinion. Willy, I'm not surprised that your wife thinks that you spend too long at the computer, I receive similar criticism, but that is due to the time it takes to read your posts to this forum!! You are very kind concerning your opinion of my film making but I do have to remind you that I was 'awarded' a One Star for a film a couple of years ago! I am sure that I must be the first film maker to have had films rated all the way from bottom to top over the years. Correct me if I can be proved wrong someone.

[Albert Noble]

I am sure that I must be the first film maker to have had films rated all the way from bottom to top over the years. Correct me if I can be proved wrong someone.

Sorry to disagree Michael, but I also join that exclusive band of the,
'Top to the Bottomers.

The argument about stars gets me. The ONLY thing that should
matter to a film maker
are, 'BUMS ON SEATS', whether or not one is present in the audience.

"Twinkle, twinkle little star,
How unimportant you really are.
Put some bums upon the seats,
Run your film, life's complete !

And to repeat what I said, many years ago,
" Audiences clean themselves, silver trophies do not."

[Willy]

Yes, I remember that once you received one star, Michael, but certainly it was not for "Hounds and the Huntsman". Imagine, they would have killed your hunting-dogs. I always know which movies would have a chance to deserve an award. That's also what you said some years ago, Michael.

Vera has never said that I spend too much time sitting at my computer. And she, too, was looking forward to attending BIAFF after three years of covid 19 and after other things. It was really shocking. You don't live far from Birminghman. We, Belgians, also have to cross the Channel and pay extra after Brexit. In our competions there are no stars at all. That's much better. There are 5 awards: one for cinematography, one for fiction, one for non-fiction, one for editing and one from the audience. Everybody happy. No moaning.

All in all it's good that I have stopped making films. I will only help some friends.

[Howard-Smith]

I have difficulty changing the way I think about star ratings. A 5 Star award is what I’m aiming for with each and every film. 5 Stars is an indication of high achievement and for me anything below that feels like an indication that the film could have been better. I’ve had so many 4 Star awards now that they don’t mean very much to me and I don’t even bother printing out the certificates.

[Martin Evans]

I was unable to make BIAFF (again!) this year. It always seems to clash with a Goalball Tournament, and as the coach... my team needs me.

I'd be very interested to hear anyone's thoughts on my film 'The Little Ones' that was screened on Friday night. I'm just making some final tweeks to it, so all feedback is good feedback.

Hi Geoff, I have some feedback for you.

At 9 mins 24, I felt Emma put her hand to her mouth after the events she'd have already just seen. I feel by the time the camera cuts to her that her hand would already be over her mouth. (Though I get that you wanted to show her shock reaction, it jumped out at me as being late)

It took me 3 viewings of this to get what was going on. These questions were all answered by the third pass but I think that as you asked I would tell you anyway:

I didn't think it was clear that some sort of glitch had caused the video to run on - past it's
initial end point to reveal all that business with her friend Carrie. (I actually remember you telling me this story over a year ago)

Who was the person in black with the straw face who came behind the humping boyfriend?
Why did Carrie change from ecstasy to anger after Jason had slumped off her?
How did all that make Carrie decide to cut his throat?
Lied about what?

As I said I answered these myself after more than one viewing.
Hope this helps.
Cheers
Martin

[fraught]

Cheers Martin, appreciate the feedback. I took a lot of the feedback provided and made changes to the film. So i'm hoping that things may be more clearer now.
I also realise that as a standalone film outside of the "anthology" it is intended to be a part of, is maybe not the right place for it. I'm hoping with the changes I've made and it watched as part of an anthology with an over-arcing storyline, will make it a more pleasing watch.

[Willy]

I received feedback from a BIAFF top-judge some weeks ago. Two pages, Michael, but I will only copy the first two sentences: "Willy, you have produced a mini-masterpiece, really you have. "Hubertus" is a most remarkable film, full to the brim with gorgeous variety, super photography, interesting facts, remarkable special effects, varying pace and overall it's a beautifully tightly edited documentary".

However, the judge of the first round said: "Perhaps you could trim your wonderful film and make it 3 minutes shorter." The same judge said three years ago about my Scottish film: "Perhaps you could trim it and make in 5 minutes shorter." By trimming both movies I would have damaged them! They would not be wonderful anymore. But, yes, everything is subjective... One of the top-organisers said to me: "Next year you will be back!"

[Howard-Smith]

I have begun to think recently that it’s too easy for judges to say that a film would be better if it were shorter. A film generally finds its own length and is as long as the filmmaker wants it to be. My film ‘The Truth’ was criticised for a supposed 20 second gap after a phone call before a conversation with someone took place whereas in fact it was only 7 seconds. A few years ago my 3 minute film called ‘The Tiff’ elicited from the judges that it “felt like a very long 3 minutes”. In 2008 a 72 minute cut of my film “Madder” was awarded 4 stars but with a comment that it could have been shorter, yet in the same year I submitted a 50 minute version of the same film under a different title and a different set of judges deemed it to be worth just 2 stars.
I’ll leave it at that as this post feels too long already.

[Michael Slowe]

There you are Howard, you illustrate perfectly just how a different group of people might view virtually the same film in a completely different way.
An award of x stars does not stamp that film with a rating for ever, it is merely the opinion of a tiny group after one or two viewings. I have seen reactions to films of mine in the past that vary wildly from judges in various competitions. Some, having won top awards, leaving audiences quite unimpressed, others, rated very low by judges, are met with enthusiastic reactions. That is why star ratings have to be accepted philosophically: we all know whether a film is any good or not and whether we enjoy seeing it, the ratings can only act as a rough guide.

[Willy]

The English top-judge also wrote: "From 30 years I've aways claimed that any judge who says the film is too long has no right to be a judge. It's the sloppiest get-out line in any review. It might apply in the one minute competition, but apart from that it does not apply. Every film is exactly the right length, and why? That's what the filmmaker decided it should do."
I myself also think that negative feedback will generally result in negative emotions, such as disappointment or guilt. Perhaps it would be better that BIAFF would only be a festival, not a competition anymore. In our "little Belgium" one of our three umbrella organizations had the courage to do this three or four years ago. Its festival is still successful.

[Albert Noble]

Anyone had a judge remark on their film, "Too short, should have been made longer," ?

[fraught]

Yep. My film 'Dead Air' has always received feedback that it was not long enough, and that the audience wanted more. But that was always its aim.