Forums
-
Latest Discussions
- Producer wanted
- (22 hours ago)
- Photo editor
- (23 hours ago)
- Shoot on the Red Scarlet from as little as $150/day!
- (1 day ago)
- Selling my Panasonic AG-HMC150
- (3 days ago)
- LET ME TELL YOUR STORY (aka 30 Days of Write)
- (6 days ago)
- KIDS ACTING CLASSES STARTING 19th MAY
- (7 days ago)
- Rode Blimp
- (7 days ago)
- Post Sound on short film?
- (7 days ago)
- monk seasons---wonderful
- (May 14th 2012)
- RECORDING A SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA ON A LOW BUDGET
- (May 13th 2012)
Vanilla 1.1.2 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
-
-
CommentAuthorgwatson
- CommentTimeNov 2nd 2008 edited
One of the biggest stumbling blocks to short films getting picked up for film festivals, broadcast or compilation releases it would seem is often length.
How short should a short film be?
I think one of the most common pieces of feedback you hear at rough cut screenings is 'There's a nice 4 minute film to be found in that 12 minute peice'.
In our classes at FTI I often ask students to think of themselves as if they were programming a film festival. If you pick a 15 minute film, then there are probably three 5 minute films your going to have to leave out. Is the 15 minute film three times a good as the 5 minute film? In most cases probably not.
I'm always amazed that we don't see more really really short films.
-
-
- CommentAuthorsharon
- CommentTimeNov 3rd 2008
I think that's exactly right - students need to understand programming festivals. A short film program should contain a variety of pieces, some longer, some shorter that create a nice "ride" for the audience. If your short runs over 20 minutes, first, it is indeed taking up several "slots" in that program, so it has to be strong enough to do that. For shorts under 10 minutes, there is the additional possibility of programming them with an appropriate feature, but what makes them difficult is that the "payoff" has to be there, that is the ending better satisfy the viewer. I actually love the 20-25 minute short because there can be a great deal of story and character development. Anything over 25 minutes is a challenge to program, so if a filmmaker creates a very long short (25-39 minutes) they MUST understand it will be difficult for them to be accepted into festivals, and they should be making them for other reasons, such as to lure investors for a feature, to get work-for-hire, etc.
-
- CommentAuthortheguycalledtom
- CommentTimeNov 6th 2008
I hate to play Devils advocate, but does anyone actually like short films? Sure, there is a place for them, maybe on youtube.
But if you are going to the trouble of going out to a Cinema to see some movies, like for a festival, wouldn't you prefer having more than 5 minutes in the dark to get absorbed in a story?
-
-
CommentAuthorgwatson
- CommentTimeNov 6th 2008
I guess that's one of the main reasons that they need good marketing.
I often find one of the big challenges in short film festivals is the journey feels like a roller coaster ride.
Happy, then sad, the scary, then funny, then serious...
Often I walk out of 90 minutes of shorts and feel like I've seen 10 features in a row.
A real challenge is finding a place where your short film can sit comfortably next to other films in a similar style or topic.
-
-
- CommentAuthorTheAcumen
- CommentTimeJan 21st 2011
I'm very new to this. So my opinion may not be that valuable. I've been watching a fair few short films lately and writing short stories.
I've realized it's not length as much as it is quality. I've seen some rather longer (over 10min) short films and they were so beautifully written and developed that I was glued to the screen. And some under 10 min shorts that i lost interested before the first minute.
Basically what Sharon said that if it's going to be long it'll need to be very strong. But i think the same applies to short films too.
-
- CommentAuthorcurl
- CommentTimeMar 2nd 2011
I too guess that it may be in some of the cases. But I originally come to same
1 to 6 of 6




