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?

Things are revving up.

Just a quick note to let you all know that the Dances With Films team got together for a meeting about year – holy crap! – 15.

I call these early meetings what-you-should-do's. In most any theatre group, or producing organization that deals with volunteers, there are tons of people who chime in with ideas, but damned few who roll up their sleeves and do the work. Worse still, are people who say they'll do the work, but don't.

But our circle of movers and shakers came without a what-you-should-do attitude. Instead, it was all what-WE-should-do. Brainstorming ideas were backed up by people taking the lead on actions.

Success is an interesting part of the entertainment industry. It can be as damning as it is wonderful. Over our fifteen years, we've seen fests come and go. Many of them had some measure of success, but then grew too fast. They got beyond their means.

We have always tried to make sure each expansion would be built on a strong foundation. Sure, every year that we add something new becomes an adventure in troubleshooting and problem solving – from the first 2Minute 2Step to last year's new Industry Choice Awards and panels. But with each successive year, the problems iron out, and what was once new becomes tradition.

At this past meeting we talked about what traditions will start with year 15.

While I have you - if you're thinking of submitting for year 15, you still have plenty of time to finish - and I mean, truly finish - your film.  Please, take a look at my past blogs to see what mistakes those who came before you made, so that you might avoid them and we won't have to watch them over and over again!

To get you started, check out The Best of the Blogs.

Thanks for reading.

Film, Football, and Finance

It's inevitable. Potential film investors will at some point come by a set to see what moviemaking is all about. Of course, they don't show up the night before, when trucks are squeezing into place. They don't show up first thing in the morning when equipment is being staged, actors rehearsed, cable run, generators started, lights focused, sets dressed, props prepared, wardrobe, hair and makeup being done. Nope. They show up just before lunch, when the director is working on the last setup and trying to get the shot before going into grace.

And what do these visitors see? A lot of people sitting around doing nothing.

"What are all these people here for?" they ask. I actually had a director ask that question once, but he was reportedly on ecstasy at the time and couldn't figure out what shot he wanted.

The question reaches beyond films sets these days. Our world has become so overrun with MBA's, who are taught that cutting costs is equivalent to increasing revenue, that politicians and corporate execs are asking it, too.  And potentially screwing up as badly as the director on ecstasy.

I faced the question once by someone who knew nothing about film. Instead of trying to explain it in movie terms, I talked sports.

"Imagine if a business person who had never seen an NFL football game was suddenly in charge of a team. 'Why do we have two kickers?' this person asks."

'Well, one is for field goals, the other is a punter.'

'But that's all kicking, right? Why can't we run that department with just one of them? A field goal, that's just 3-points, right?  And we have more players on the sidelines than we do on the field. Why is that?'"

The film observer got the point, and to drive it home, I told him to watch what happens when they turn the world. (That's turning the camera around to look the other way, for you folks that don't know). I've had a chance to work with some of the best crews this business has to offer. I think you could sell tickets to watch them work.

Of course, that's the major leagues. Just like sports, if you're playing in the minors you make do with what you've got. Indie filmmakers achieve the same thing with less people, but it takes more time – and they don't have a multi-million dollar star with a 12 hour door-to-door contract waiting to work.

So if a film finance person, politician, or corporate executive asks, "can't we do that for less?" the answer may be, "Yes, but it'll cost you more."

Thanks for reading.