Film
What's on at the cinema plus reviews of the latest movie and DVD releases
Bookmark this page
Short change
LFF short film programmer Philip Ilson declares 'Death to Short Film'!
Nov 3 2006
As a short-film programmer for both the London Film Festival and the Halloween Short Film Festival, I've waded through many sacks of short films over the past months. I've watched thousands of DVDs and a few old-school VHS tapes. This is all good. It's obvious that the world of filmmaking is alive and well. But there's a downside: cheaper and easier access to cameras and editing equipment means that the activity is no longer restricted to the select few who have gone through traditional training. These days, it feels like everyone and his dog has a short film inside them, not least because of the proliferation of open-access websites, screening opportunities and film festivals.
It's time to take a cold, hard look at this filmmaking overkill. It's time to do the punk-rock thing and sweep aside the old guard. It's time to stop the onslaught of short film as we know it. In short, it's time for a manifesto. Its intention? To assassinate short film and simultaneously inspire a phoenix-like rebirth.
1) Short films must not be calling cards designed to get work in features or television.
This is the most important point for any discerning maker of short films. There are thousands of media students waiting to break into television to direct soaps, comedy or drama, alongside many film school students graduating and wanting to hit Hollywood and gain Oscar glory. How can anyone compete? Screw 'em all! The only thing that exists for you is your current short film. Harbour no secret dreams of directing 'EastEnders' or walking up the red carpet. Stay focused on the job in hand.
2) Short films must not be about showcasing cinematography, editing or other technical skills.
You are the director. You must make your film exactly as you want. If you need a ten-minute single cloud shot mid-film, that's your choice. You don't need to prove anything to anyone except yourself. If a scene needs a fast complex edit, then do it, but remember it's because the scene needs it and not because you want to show off your new Final Cut Pro skills.
3) Short films must not have an optimum running time; they can last a few seconds or much longer.
Films should exist in their own time-space continuum. No one should tell you it has to fit into a specific slot. Short films are as long as they need to be to tell their story or play out their scenario. (NB Festival programmers may have a problem with this point. Tough luck.)
4) Short films must not have endings that tie everything up, but should feel as though their story could continue after the credits roll.
This is the Raymond Carver rule: think slices of life and powerful scenarios. So many short films think they need a punchline, a final joke or a 'Sixth Sense'-style twist to tie things up neatly and make the audience go away contented. But it's not necessary. How many more times do we have to hear that collective groan in a darkened cinema as the film comes to a close? We want to reflect on a character's life or to think about what move he or she will make next, even though we have no way of knowing. We need to think more and to be kept guessing. We need to have discussion. This is what the best art does.
5) Short films must not be made with an audience in mind. Filmmakers must not believe that an audience needs a cunning twist or a happy ending.
The only audience is the filmmaker who's making the film, and if a few other people like it too, then great! But don't make the film with an audience in mind. They are not important to your vision. You do not exist to make their life happier or richer.
6) Short films must not be restricted by genre.
Is it a comedy drama, a spoof documentary, an animated experimental gallery piece? Who cares? It's a film…
7) Short films must not open with an alarm clock going off and the main protagonist waking up in a brightly lit room.
This is where it gets personal. Do any of us sleep in full bright sunlight? Do our lives only ever begin when we wake up in bed in the morning?
8) Short films must not be accompanied by a slow and poignant solo piano soundtrack.
Plinky-plonky piano music to create a mood? No! Please no one else go there. Unless of course, that piano is integral to your vision rather than it being cheap because your mate has a Woolworths stand-up electric. But please, for the sanity of short film programmers, find another option for your soundtrack.
To sum up: we want original voices, auteur visions, works of art. Of course, this will give us a proliferation of overblown, pompous and arrogant filmmakers who barge their way around Cannes and Sundance. But the true ones will shine through – I promise! It's happened in the past. Since I've been programming shorts, in the UK I've seen the career paths and amazing work of Andrea Arnold, Andrew Kötting, Alison Murray, Shane Meadows, Lynne Ramsay. These are the filmmakers who've transcended the norm, who've bucked the trends outlined above; I could even argue that some of their shorts are far superior to their features. But now it's time to bring on the next generation.
Arise makers of short films! With this eight-point plan as a guide, go and create. Kill off the fakes and scare off the phonies who are fast taking over the world of short film.
The next Halloween Short Film Festival runs Jan 6 to 15 2007.
User comments on this story
-
- BenL said...
-
Seesm like a lot of it makes sense and I agree it's best to make the film for you and hope the audience likes your style and imagination.
I've produced and directed 5 shorts and agree with the other writer's who say that they make great calling cards (now I just make them for fun).
However, the calling card should not be the motivation - telling the story in a unique way should be! Posted on Mar 10 2008 17:07 - Report as inappropriate
-
- Luke said...
-
I could weep! Just did my first short and guess what, it starts with someone waking up in the morning...It's funny, though, it needs a little bit of setup so now its going to start on a phone call with the other character, then show the film's title. Then show someone waking up. I won't do it again!
PS - at least it doesn't end in a twist.
7) Short films must not open with an alarm clock going off and the main protagonist waking up in a brightly lit room.
This is where it gets personal. Do any of us sleep in full bright sunlight? Do our lives only ever begin when we wake up in bed in the morning? Posted on Nov 07 2007 12:55 - Report as inappropriate
-
- philip ilson said...
-
Well, it's good to come back to this site a few months later to see some new comments, particually as I will be one of those programming shorts again at this year's London Film Festival. As regards to Ryan's comment about setting up your own film festival, he is refering to the short film festival that I've been running in London for a few years: The Halloween Short Film Festival had it's fourth version at the Curzon Soho, ICA and Roxy Bar & Screen back in January this year, and we're currently planning the next Festival for next January, with a name change to the London Short Film Festival. The original Halloween Festival grew out of short film screenings that I've been organising across London since 1994. So, watch this space....
p.s. shout out to Iain who remembers me from school! Posted on Mar 29 2007 11:36 - Report as inappropriate
-
- Stephen F said...
- Reading through these comments, I would have to say the debate was pretty rational until Ryan's contribution. And his suggestion to 'go make your own festival' was silly. As if Phillip Ilson made the London Film Festival. He wasn't even born when it began. I believe a programmer, like a critic, should not be so indulgent of his/her personal tastes, or should work hard to develop their appreciation of film, certainly beyond the level of 'it was a bit stilted' - understatement with regard to the pititfully inept WALKMAN - 'but it made me feel warm.' Posted on Mar 03 2007 20:41
- Report as inappropriate
-
- iain said...
- I remember Philip from school Posted on Jan 10 2007 23:51
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Ryan Phillips said...
-
I would like to second Jim’s comments above. I believe Phillip’s manifesto is born out of watching vast amounts of shorts, which tread the same path, and as a programmer it must be very frustrating to watch the same thing over and over. All Phillip is trying to do with the manifesto is shake things up a bit, make filmmakers think out of the box, experiment a little.
Secondly and just for the record I would like add that my film BLOOD AND CHIPS was shown in the NUGGETS programme at the LFF. I was proud to have it shown with the other films and I am saddened that the Death to Short Film debate has turned into an argument about Phillips personal taste. I thought the programme was varied enough that there was something for everyone. There seems to be an air of elitism about the attacks on the programme, to be frank I have seen enough polished turds to know that production values don’t make a film good, its how it resonates with the viewer. For example I disliked the multi award winning CUBS which for me despite having amazing production values said nothing to me about my life and felt complete soulless. CUBS was loved by many others and scooped the best independent short award so it was obviously a question of personal taste. If you didn’t like Phillip’s programme then quit bitching and make your own festival, which reflects your tastes. I hope that clears things up and we can now return to a rational debate about the manifesto… Posted on Dec 03 2006 15:08 - Report as inappropriate
-
- jim hosking said...
- i am a film maker. i applaud phil for furthering the debate. as far as i am concerned that is nothing but a positive. why should so many people be so critical and defensive? this encourages thought and debate and hopefully a bit more self-criticism. there are not enough people doing their own thing. i like seeing films that make me jealous. and there are not enough. i am sick of worthy slice of life sketches though. where's the imagination! let us reach for the skies brethren and sisterthren! i am not sure what the female version of brethren is. but i am pleased with my stab in the dark. Posted on Dec 02 2006 18:37
- Report as inappropriate
-
- philip ilson said...
- It's strange that the DEATH TO SHORT FILM arguement / programme has turned into a discussion about the NUGGETS programme. When asked to programme at the 2006 LFF, I was looking out for lower budget shorts, but this turned into low budget shorts AND very short shorts within a single programme. A film like BLOOD AND CHIPS within that programme was clearly a 'professional broadcast standard' film which I would not consider low budget, but in meeting the filmmaker it turned out he had pulled a lot of favours and it was made for a small amount. But clearly the mock-doc A LOOK AT COOK was a throwaway sketch that cost very little, and I was pleased to hear audiences members in hysterics. Two other other titles WALKMAN and EAST SIDE STORY may have been been slightly stilted, but when I first saw them they left a warm feeling inside. Ultimately I was pleased with the programme, even though there were a number of films I had to leave out which I really loved too. Posted on Dec 02 2006 16:27
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Mary said...
- I would like to know how you determined, Phillip, that a short-film was low-budget. What worries me is that you based that on poor production values. What if someone were dedicated and talented enough to do thier own post-production to an exceptional standard or were persuasive enough to bring in other skilled talent, or secure great locations? Reading between the lines, Phillip, I'd say you'd assume that such films were not low-budget. You might not afford them the indulgence you clearly did with many of those selected for the NUGGETS programme. Posted on Nov 27 2006 12:29
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Kramer said...
- Phillip, don't you feel that a festival as prestigious as the LFF should have a quality threshold? They may have been short and very low-budget, but too many of the films in the NUGGETS programme were also poorly scripted, or badly acted, clumsily staged, or hackneyed, or just plain 'show it to your friends and relatives' daft. I have to ask, will your programming for next year's festival be consistent with your manifesto, or will you further dilute the status of the festival with more of this amateurish dross? Posted on Nov 27 2006 11:35
- Report as inappropriate
-
- philip ilson said...
- I'd like to point out that the NUGGETS programme in the LFF wasn't the DEATH TO SHORT FILM programme; you're right that NUGGETS did have many of the short film cliches, but the programme was a chance for lower budget films to get a chance of an international film festival screening, and I took some chances which I knew wasn't going to be to everyone's taste. But as one comment points out, all this is about personal taste, particually 'my taste'. I was given the job of programming, so I chose what to show - end of story. This is how we've worked with our own Festival, and it seems to do OK and people like it (and some don't). Basically, I'm a film fan, so I enjoy watching the work and screening it to an audience. Yes, I have made films before too, but no, I've no desire to move back to that or into a producers role. To sum up, the Manifesto was a bit of fun not to be taken too seriously; the vast body of work out there is very exciting, but having to watch so much of it, frustrations can get the better of you. BTW, the DEATH TO SHORT FILM programme in the LFF was praised by a number of people as "the best short film programme they'd ever seen" , so some people were pleased. Posted on Nov 17 2006 11:14
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Richard Hare said...
- I thought punk was about that mass of people DIY-ing you seem to have so much disdain for..! Posted on Nov 04 2006 11:08
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Ricky D said...
-
I agree with the first two comments. A festival programmer who issues a manifesto had better make damn sure their own programming selections are consistent with it. That was patently not the case with some of the selections for this year's festival.
Philip Ilson would be better advised, as Shane Vahey implies, to pursue his personal agenda by having a quiet word with funding bodies, film schools, and producers. Good luck! Finally, the first part of his manifesto is utterly disingenuous: most short films are calling cards as most short film-makers want to move on to features (or TV or ads/videos). It's really a matter of whether their short film has sufficient merit of its own or, more to the point, whether it appeals to Philip Ilson's personal tastes. Isn't it? Posted on Nov 03 2006 16:28 - Report as inappropriate
-
- Shane Vahey said...
- Very interesting. I get a real sense of anger and frustration from Philip's complaints and advice. I understand where he's coming from and beg him to become a producer. Would he consider producing one of my scripts? I've made shorts before and always gone against the grain. Sadly, some people just love to conform, but it's terribly frustrating for many filmmakers to be told over and over that we must conform to the current norm, write scripts that are pre-approved before shooting, make sure it fits a standard genre, remember people want happy endings, with or without a twist. Look at the fims that are getting funded, we're told. Don't go over ten minutes. Don't go over four minutes. Three. Two. One. There is now an ocean of schemes, courses and other opportunities sucking people with no real training into making short films. We have an awfully big gap between this at the very bottom and making features. How about reviving the medium-length film? How about funding medium films and screening them at festivals? It's not surprising some makers of one or two great little shorts fall down when suddenly propelled into making a mighty feature. Many would fare better if they were allowed to go one step at a time. We need serious funding to do this, however, and proper exposure for longer films. Posted on Nov 03 2006 13:56
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Kramer said...
- I agree. With both JayV and Philip Tilson. I too am fed up with short films that end with a twist, etc. I saw the Nuggets programme too and many of them did break Mr Tilson's own manifesto rules: twists, genre pics, calling cards. And let's not forget also that one of the most favoured shorts in the festival - MASH UP - was a 'twister' in the same way as Jacob's Ladder or The Sixth Sense. These exceptions prove that publishing 'rules' will only serve to embarrass programmers and infuriate film-makers. Posted on Nov 03 2006 01:43
- Report as inappropriate
Most popular on this site
Top Stories
The Coens' 'Burn after Reading': review
Pitt and Clooney star in the Coen brothers' latest, 'Burn After Reading', which opened the 2008 Venice film festival
John C Reilly on ‘Step Brothers’
Method man turned slapstick comic John C Reilly talks to Time Out about his new film ‘Step Brothers’
Guy Ritchie on ‘RocknRolla’
Wally Hammond talks to Guy Ritchie about his latest film, ‘RocknRolla’ which sees him safely back in his old manor among the familiar carnival of villains, scams and high-octane spills and thrills
Saul Dibb on ‘The Duchess’
Dave Calhoun discovers from director Saul Dibb that his latest, 'The Duchess’ is far from your typical aristos-in-love movie
Opinion: Can George Lucas still make ‘small’ movies?
With the release of animated spin-off 'Star Wars: The Clone Wars', Tom Huddleston wonders whether George Lucas will ever return to his roots.
What do you think?
Post your comment now