Part 1

Part 1
Context

Go to:
http://www.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/feature/237/

Read the article entitled: “Eat my shorts”

Make notes on:

 why people go to the trouble of making short films in the first place

 the situation with short filmmaking when shorts were still being shot on celluloid

 the impact that DV technology has had on the short film

 the distribution and exhibition possibilities for short films made in the UK

 the limitations of the format (what, according to some, can’t shorts achieve that features can?)

 the conclusion reached by the writer about the situation of short film in the UK at the time of the article’s publication

 how up-to-date you think the article is (providing reasons)


Why people go to the trouble of making short films in the first place?

The majorities of viewers who enjoy films re more interested in feature films and see short films as a waste of time and are not interested in watching them. This means that cinemas don’t screen short films and programmes such as channel 4 and the BBC only show short films late at night as a time filler. However most filmmakers see short films as a piece of art, filmmakers such as Peter Greenaway and Derek Jarman agrees with this. Other directors see short films as a personal ad for their work to get noticed in order for them t make a feature film in the future.

The situation with shorts filmmaking when shorts were still being shot on celluloid?

In the late 1990s most films were shot on celluloid. Only a few people would gain access to the funding for celluloid, because it was highly expensive, meaning there were limited opportunities for a small group of people to gain healthy funding for their short films. As well as this there was no investment in finding new talent, making it harder for new directors to be noticed and given funding.

The impact that DV technology has had on the short film?

DV is a much cheaper format, so it saves filmmakers money. When editing the footage, it becomes easier and allows most people to edit from their own homes, therefore saving money in post- production. The DV technology has made it easier for people to make short films, this means there is a proliferation of short films being made, which will in turn impact the film industry as it will draw more attention to short films.
However the impact of DV wasn’t all good, people assumed that mistakes made during filming could be fixed when editing. Asif Kapadia said “ When you are a film student you are very aware of how much film costs, so you’re not going to start shooting until you know exactly what you want. Theres a danger with digital that you don’t make any real decisions until you are on set, and then you assume any problems can be sorted in post-production.” By that he means that DV has caused some directors to become clumsier with their work rather than more precise. There is the point that not all mistakes can be edited out in post-production. Overall DV shares a positive impact on short film making as well as a negative approach.


The distribution and exhibition possibilities for short films made in the UK?

There is a big problem with the distribution of short films in the UK. The audiences for short films are small, meaning there are fewer people that are interested in viewing a short film. In the UK it is difficult to get your short films shown in the cinemas but also getting them shown on television programmes like channel 4 and the BBC. The reason for this is that the majority of viewers take no interest in this style of film. However some cinemas like to put a short film and a feature film together in the cinema, this means that if the feature film is 90 minutes long then a short film could be added to the list to be shown at the same time. This would make it easier for short films to gain more recognition. Saying this most people believe that in order for a short film to be most successful using this scheme then the shorter the better.
A UK company known as Short Circuit Films, pride themselves in trying to distribute short films to cinemas and programmers. Due to this several cinemas host monthly short film screenings, others loan filming equipment to independent filmmakers and some even invite directors in for screening events and Q&A sessions.

The limitations of the format? (What, according to some, cant shorts achieve the features can?)

A man called Evan Mather realised that digital looks best when it is watched via the internet. The reason for this is that DV has its limitations, when it comes to the quality. Often when films are produced on DV they can turn out grainy and of poor quality as the dimensions and proxemics can change on different cameras, making it difficult when watching the short on a festival style screen. This is different when a film is produced on celluloid.
Although most DV produced films look best on the Internet this has its positive and negative effects to the director. The director would receive honest and reliable feedback, but the exposure on the Internet wouldn’t have as much impact.
Digital technology is cheaper, but if it isn’t converted to celluloid, it means that many people can maker their short films.

The conclusion reached by the writer of the article about the current situation of short film in the UK?

In this article the writer talks about short films in term of limitations, positives, the impact and the causes. To conclude the article the writer first talks about the UKFC how they carry out government policy to empower Britain’s regions and nations. What this means is that they have a responsibility for looking out for new talent. He then goes on to talking about how new technologies will do well in short films, however just because there is a proliferation in the amount of short films that are being created doesn’t mean there is a higher percentage of directors who are being funded for their work. In turn this means there are more short films but less directors with funding for future projects.

How up-to-ate do you think the article is? (Providing reason)

From reading this article it is clear that it was written some time ago because some f the references can be seen as old news. For example the writer talks about the UKFC and its future plans by saying “the UKFC plans to have 250 screens in 150 cinemas by summer 2005.” Just by reading this we can see it was written around 2004, making some of the information with in it out of date.
In the article it talks about DV as a brand new technology, however now a day’s digital media is the most common form of technology we use in film. In today’s media HD (High Definition) is the new DV as well as other technologies like Blu-ray and 3-D cinema. But as HD is one of he new technologies out at the moment it means that it can be quite expensive, meaning many people resort to using digital media as a cheaper method. In regards to the article the example of DV back then was true but in today’s film industry they are not considered as factual statements.
On the other hand you could consider some of the information in this article to still be true in this time period. For instance the statement about short films not having a big audience is still true, but the difference is that companies like channel 4 have scheduled time to put short films on their TV slots and on their website. The information about short films being mainly shown at film festivals is still true as this is where directors can b noticed and gain funding.
Overall the article could be seen as out-dated however most of the important information is still true to this day.

Catch 22

Short films represent the way that many if not most filmmakers get recognised initially. Done superbly well, they can become a new director’s ticket onto the restricted access ladder that leads to making a feature film. Yet so many obstacles still stand in the way of short filmmakers and the all important “airplay” of the short films they make.

How effectively does the article explain and answer this paradox?

The article explains and answers this paradox well. It talks about how a short film can get a person recognised to be feature filmmaker and explains the difficulties of what would happen. It talks about how you could you the short film to make yourself known and identify yourself in the film industry. The article explores the imitations and possibilities for short filmmakers and why they create them.

Find at least two other articles which examine the importance of short films and their effectiveness as stepping stones to longer format films for emerging filmmakers. Do they address the paradoxes/challenges for short filmmakers?