Age Appropriate Filmmaking

First, I have to give a shout out to the filmmaker who said being mentioned in this blog would be almost as cool as getting in the festival.

Well? Is it?

We had a night of solid acting across the board. Nice job, folks. A good picture of bad acting is a bad picture. I cannot tell you how important it is to get the cast right, and most of the films we saw last night did.

Among these good actors were a lot of kids – from high school to barely walking. I'm sure we saw more than one future star last night. I hope they'll come do some promotions for us when their movies are no longer eligible for competition.

Regular readers will be glad to know the "Good Logo = Bad Movie" rule is still in effect. I don't know if anyone has ever noticed, but most production companies with studio distribution deals didn't start with an expensive, grandiose opening logo. They put their energy into making good films. The big logo comes after your work has earned more money than you know what to do with. When I see a fancy opening announce the production company I think, "that's time, money, and effort that could have gone into another day of shooting or writing, paying a cast and crew." And every single time, the quality of the movie proves me right.

Last night one of our screeners said something we hear a lot. "If that film was made by my 12-year-old niece, I'd say it was brilliant, but..."

That's one of the difficulties of judging submissions. We know absolutely nothing about the filmmakers who submit – which is a good thing, as it helps eliminate prejudice – but, what if the film was made by a 12-year-old? We all passed on the movie because we're not a festival geared toward grade school filmmakers, and by adult standards the movie wasn't any good. Chances are nearly 100% that it was made by an adult, but there is that little bit of doubt.

So if there are any kid filmmakers who have submitted, don't take it too hard if you don't get in. Just finishing a movie is a huge accomplishment – even for adults. Keep up the good work.

If you're an adult and you've made a movie that looks like it was made by a child... keep the day job.

We had a film that was so incredibly unique that the creativity trumped the various little things that would have killed a lesser movie. Well done. We do get so tired of seeing films in the style of what's hot on TV.

We want your voice, not someone else's.

On that note, thanks for reading. See you next week.

The Basics

Year 15 started out great. Good food. Good people. Good movies – well, at least two good ones.


I dreaded putting the first DVD into the machine, as it looked to be by actors about acting. Nine times out of ten, those are painfully bad. The experienced screeners in the room groaned as we wrote down the title, so imagine how happy we were when it turned out to be fantastic! This wasn't a movie about actors acting – it's about actors NOT acting. Nice job, guys. I'll see you at the next meeting.

We have enough submissions to split into two rooms and when the other group emerged at the end of the night they said, "We have the topic for your next blog – Beginning, Middle, and End."

I knew exactly what they were talking about, so let's start off this year with the basics.

Artists, by nature, are rule breakers. No risk, no reward. I'm right there with you. Go for it!

But...

If you plan on re-inventing the wheel, keep in mind, your finished product has to do what a wheel does. A stone block is not a re-invented wheel. Whatever you come up with has to fit on a cart and make it move with ease or you have failed.

Some artists, especially young ones, think they are going to re-invent storytelling. They are going to do it in a way that's never been done before. Really? In the 3,000 years mankind has been writing down and performing stories they have never come up with what you have?

Okay. I say go for it. From your hubris something new might very well emerge.

But...

When you're done, your story has to be a story. It has to fit on a cart and make it move with ease. It has to have a beginning, middle and end or you have failed. You might have failed valiantly. We might applaud your effort – but we won't be showing your effort to the public.

Sometimes these type of experiments are near-misses. If you dig into that sucker with an eye toward the basics, you will probably find a buried traditional structure. Bring that to the surface and you're golden.

In our screening room we saw a lot of DRRRAAAAMMMMAAAA! I have bruises on my head from how beaten I was with the seriousness of what we watched. Counterpoint, people! If your film is serious, find the humor. If it's funny, find the pathos.

Cello is the slow music instrument of choice it seems. I think I counted three films with slow, dragging, dramatic music over slow, dragging, dramatic action. I slowly dragged my pen around the PASS choice on our forms. One nice standout, music-wise, featured some happy banjo playin'. During an establishing shot of a man walking up stairs to a house I commented about how that would be different with the slow music we had in earlier films. As it was, a possibly boring shot was made entertaining. Nice.

We had one film with grandiose, feature-style credits. Looked great. Cut them. It's called a short for a reason.

Art department. This is where a lot of low-budget projects fall down. It's fine to shoot in your apartment, but remember – just because you're a starving artist with nothing on your walls and barely any furniture, doesn't mean your characters are. Dress up the shots a bit. Pull actors away from flat walls. Stick a plant back there. Keep the receipt, hide the label, and return it to OSH when you're done. It's free.

Pet peeve of the year. Filmmakers, STOP SHAKING THE CAMERA! It doesn't make the movie look more immediate. It doesn't make it "documentary style." Documentary filmmakers do their damnedest to make handheld shots look smooth. You should do the same.

I don't particularly like this style in major motion pictures either, but at least when they do it, they are working with heavy cameras, remote focus pullers, cable wranglers and dolly grips. When all of this moves there is some weight behind it. When you're bouncing behind your actors with a palm-corder, your film becomes less about the story and more about the camera and how cheap and self-serving you are as a filmmaker.

Please: Move the camera with majesty.

Question: What's with so many films coming out that are too dark to see? This isn't just indie stuff. I couldn't see J. Edgar, and Tom Stern is no slouch. There has to be a technical thing in the digital world I don't know about. Okay, there are a million technical things in the digital world I don't know about – but one of them makes for movies that are too dark to see. Let's stop doing that.

Prediction: With all the great SLR cameras out there, I have a prediction of what I'm going to be complaining about for years to come. Focus. A better camera is like a better, more powerful, piece of software – it's harder to use. Yes, just like the software, you can make it easy, but at the cost of professionalism. Like anyone in the modern world, I can point and shoot a video camera. Like anyone else who has made a little movie to throw up on the web, I can get the coverage and even edit it.

That doesn't mean I'd hire me as a Director of Photography. Technology makes things doable at an affordable cost. Skills, talent, and experience make them worth watching.

Thanks for reading.

Rules of the Road

Screenings start this week, so I thought I'd do a quick rundown how things work around here.

Our screening committee is made up mostly of Dances With Films alumni like myself, and some people that have been with us for years who just love movies. If you are an alumni in LA and would like to screen, let us know, we'll see if we can make that happen. The committee gets together once a week to watch short films. We also eat, have a beer or two, chit-chat, etc.

But mostly, we watch tons of short films. Sometimes we'll talk about what we've just watched. Other times we just write our critiques and move on. At the end of the night, we take features home to screen and bring back next week. All films are seen by at least 3 screeners.

Each week, I write something here about how it's going. My objective has always been to give filmmakers a peek into what we're seeing – especially since we see a lot of the same type of movies over and over.

We see the same mistakes over and over.

And every year we see some movies that are so fantastic we want everyone to see them.

I would like to see more of the fantastic movies and less of the bad ones – so I started this blog. It's my hope that aspiring filmmakers will learn from those who have gone before them, so I don't have to watch the same mistakes ... over and over.

If you've submitted this year, not to worry. I never mention titles. When I talk about stuff in movies that suck, I am always – ALWAYS – talking about a trend we're seeing in more than one film.

So if you read something about poorly lit, handheld shots of a lead character slowly walking down the street silently contemplating life for ten minutes while a piano plunks out one or two notes before a cello drags a counterpoint note through the mud, don't tell me that you know for a fact that I'm making fun of your movie. Trust me! Practically every other film we screen has this scene in it.

And they all suck!

If, however, your movie is one of the fantastic ones – I might just drop enough hints for you to recognize that I'm talking about you. We get too much rejection in this business not to sneak in something nice from time-to-time.

If you think I'm saying good things about your film, please don't book a flight to LA for the festival. This blog is unofficial. We're a long way from June, and as you'll see, there are tons of factors that go into the decision-making process.

We are going to be as vigilant as possible in letting those films we like know, in advance, that we're interested, to keep you guys from popping your world premiere on a beach somewhere where no one will see it.

Early notification does NOT guarantee anything. It does mean you've got a good movie. That alone is something to be proud of.

If we pass on your film you will be notified, but those letters go out just before the festival. I know that sucks, but on more than one occasion we have had a last minute slot to fill, so we like to keep all options open as long as possible.

Finally, we don't screen in any particular order.  If you submitted in December and don't hear anything through February that means absolutely nothing. We don't make final decisions until all movies have been seen.

Good luck everyone! Thanks for reading. Make a comment every now and then so I know you're out there.

In Memoriam - Mark Nelson

Dances With Films and magicians everywhere have lost an unsung hero.

Mark Nelson passed away this week. He was a dedicated screener and legal advisor for Dances With Films and a jack of all trades for The Magic Castle.

When I think of Mark one phrase comes to mind, old-school, and I mean that in all the best connotations. There was nothing prefabricated about Marc. He took no short cuts. Anything he did, he did from head-to-toe.

He had a love of film and its history that ran deep. His respect for filmmakers showed in every submissions screening session. Most independent filmmakers have no idea who Mark Nelson was, but if they submitted to DWF, then they owe him a debt. He praised the good ones, and never EVER turn off the bad ones. When we say we watch all the movies all the way through, "we" was often Mark.

I've said in this blog before that other screeners disagreed with my opinion. I was usually talking about Mark. Our taste in old films was lock-stepped together. Our opinions of new ones often differed, but always with respect.

Politically we were as far apart as two people can be, but I enjoyed our debates. Unlike the current Congress, we could usually find some common ground, like the fact that the current Congress can't find any common ground.

I have no doubt that Mark's journey to the afterlife is exactly as Mr. Jordan described it. For Mark, that will mean a casting session in a grand old studio. Clarence, wings and all, will call his name. Claude Rains will him lead into the lush office with a whisper of confidence, "You're going to like this role."

The next bell you hear ring will be for Mark.  He's earned his wings.

Tell Your Friends!

As we come up on screenings, I can see the writing on the wall. This year will be no different than any other. A few filmmakers will drop by the blog to read about the submissions.

If they read about something I say is bad, they'll think I'm talking about their film and maybe post a nasty comment.

If they read about something I say is good, they'll think I'm talking about their film and post questions about premiere status and should they book their tickets to LA now, or wait until later? (Definitely wait).

After reading a post or two, they won't come back... until April.

The closer we get to announcing what films are in the festival, the more my numbers spike.

And that's fine. I get that. You're excited about your film, as well you should be – but by then, most of what I write about is of little use to the film you've already submitted.

I write about the trends we're seeing in submissions. Mostly the bad ones. If you're thinking about making a movie to submit to festivals, then you'll want to read my blog BEFORE YOU WRITE YOUR SCRIPT. Find out what screeners are tired of seeing because every other filmmaker thought it was a cool idea. It probably was a cool idea when whoever did it first did it two years ago. Now, not so much.

Of course, I understand if you've already submitted that you're looking for any hint about how your movie is doing. I got the idea for this blog from a literary agent (that means books everywhere on the planet but Hollywood) who published her thoughts on query submissions without revealing any details about the work. I recognized her comments on my letter and made changes accordingly, and it helped.

Hopefully, you'll find the same kind of help as we move forward, but please – for our sake – tell your fellow filmmakers who are facing the blank page to read this blog NOW, not after they've spent tons of money and time on something no one wants to see.

Thanks for reading.

So You Didn't Get Into Sundance - Merry Christmas!

Dances With Films is open for submissions!

My regular readers know that I don't blow the company horn here... much. This post is an exception. Of course, you still need to develop your own strategy for festivals, but DWF should certainly be on your world premiere check list.

 Festival in a major market (New York, Los Angeles or Chicago)

 Good press coverage – any festival that promises coverage in the trades is probably lying – unless that paper is a major sponsor. Every year The Hollywood Reporter and Variety say they don't cover festivals, and every year we get some films reviewed. Knock wood. That's not to mention coverage in:

Los Angeles Times • The New York Times • E! Online • Ain't It Cool News • CNN • Associated Press • Extra • Film & Video Magazine • Film Threat • Starz! • LA Times • Entertainment Today • USA Today • IndieWIRE • KABC • KCRW • US • Weekly • 60 Minutes • IndieWire • TheWrap.com • Angeleno Magazine • Moviemaker Magazine

 Good track record. What can I say? DWF is heading into year 15.

 Good to filmmakers. Ask any of our alumni. Go ahead. Ask.

Hopefully, you still have your world premiere status. That's a huge help. Once you've premiered in the major markets, then you can build your pedigree in the destination festivals around the world.

We look forward to seeing your movies. Keep an eye out here beginning late January for my insight on what we're seeing in submissions. If your movie is good, you might recognize my comments. When I mention problems, it is always something we're seeing in more than one submission, so don't take it too hard.

Good luck.

Life in a Mafia

No, this isn't a crime story. In theatre and film a mafia refers to a group of artists with a common background that often work together. These groups can be centered around universities, like the Yale Mafia (Meryl Streep, Wendy Wasserstein, Sigourney Weaver, etc.), the Julliard Mafia (Robin Williams, Kevin Kline, William Hurt, etc.). They also form from writers or theatre groups, such as the (David) Mamet Mafia (Joe Mantegna, William H. Macy, Stuart Gordon, etc.), Steppenwolf alumni (Gary Sinise, Joan Allen, Glenne Headly, etc.).

I got to thinking about art mafia groups again while at the University of North Carolina School of the Arts West Coast Alumni Christmas party. For some reason, NCSA (or, now UNCSA) has never formed a strong mafia. It's something we often discuss, but no one is sure what to do about. Like so many who attended, I didn't graduate from there, but went on to Virginia Commonwealth University – another school with a weak mafia.

So what makes a strong one?

I think it requires a good mix of disciplines: writers, actors, directors, cinematographers and especially business people. A group that doesn't have a good mix is going to have a hard time putting projects together and getting them before an audience. Loyalty is important, but each member also has to look out for themselves. Many mafias claim people who "made it" outside of the group, which is fine. These stars can come back to their friends to launch projects in a familiar atmosphere.

Making do with less, or a certain level of discomfort, is an element. I fell into the Mamet Mafia in Los Angeles when I worked on the stage production of Edmond that years later became the film. It was amazing to watch actors with Broadway credits I'd kill for climbing ladders, sweeping the stage, taking tickets, etc. We formed a theatre group that lasted for about 10 years. Those who were willing to do the dirty work became trusted friends and co-workers. Those who didn't, didn't. From there, I was able to build an ensemble that got my film made.

Dances With Films has started to form a bit of a mafia. Mojave Phone Booth got started in the lobby of the festival, and yesterday, I got an e-mail from DWF alumni who have just gotten funding together for their next movie. They want me to play a role, which I'm always happy to do. The 2-Minute 2-Step, which is an exercise in less-is-more production, has put together teams that I hear have gone on to work together on other projects.

And it's not just filmmakers. The internet has helped novelists get together. As I write this, I've been exchanging e-mails with one of my partners on From The Write Angle. She has been kind enough to do a beta read on my next book. We got together on the net forum, Agent Query Connect.

Which brings me to another topic.

Without A Box, the submission service for filmmakers, has moved its forum to Facebook. That's fine, but I tend to get lost on Facebook. I miss the close connection a stand-alone, topic-specific forum can bring. So I've dedicated a page on this blog called QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS. This is a place for all of us to use as a forum. Please feel free to post in the comments section just as you would in a forum.

Who knows, maybe we'll get our own mafia started.

What about you? What groups did I miss? Have you gotten a project together from your experience with DWF? Would you like to?