Internet Based Research

Part 1- Context

Why do people go to the trouble of making short films in the first place? ·         There are different reasons as to why people go to the trouble of making and producing short films. Many traditional directors during the 60’s and 70’s saw short film making as a different art form in its own right, such as Peter Greenway (Train, 5 Postcards From Capital Cities) and Derek Jarman (Imagining October, Pirate Tape). Other film makers around this time also saw shorts as a way of experimentation. However, in the film industry, short films can be seen as way of promotion for directors for feature length films. In addition some people make short films as a way to break into the industry and get recognised by the media, who are always looking out for talented directors, which was the case with talented directors Asif Kapadia and Lynne Ramsay. 

What was the situation with short filmmaking when shorts were still being shot on celluloid?·In the late 90’s it was hard for people who had no experience in making films to secure public funding to make a film . In turn this meant that because of the amount of money it took to produce a short film, a small degree of new talent was being discovered. At this time, budgets for short films being made on celluloid were increasing. For example films that were being made under Film Four’s short film branch, ‘Short and Curlies’ were costing between £60,000-£90,000, such as Tinge Krishnan’s ‘Shadowscan’ which cost £90,000. These costs seemed excessive to many people, due to the films only being seen by a small group of people, and the fact a much smaller amount of money could be used to help short film makers using digital equipment.

What has impact DV technology had on the short film?·Due to these large budgets, in 2001, the UK film council launched a scheme to use £1.5 million over 3 years, to produce 100 short films a year. Each film was to be shot on a £10,000 budget using only DV. However, many people thought it was too unrealistic to use only £10,000 per film, and was too restricting to force filmmakers to work only with DV.  However DV can make the different stages of production quicker and easier, due to the flexibility of the format and availability of cheap equipment. This means that it is much easier for more people to create short films at little or no cost by using editing packages at home and cheaper equipment. In addition the format has made it easier to distribute short films using DVD and the internet.   

The distribution and exhibition possibilities for short films made in the UK·There are many different and effective ways to distribute short films. One company, ‘Short Circuit films’, tried attaching films made on the UKFC’s digital shorts scheme to feature length films. However this meant that the short’s had to be the right length (around 3-5 minutes) and the cinema owners had to enthusiastic about the shorts. However, there are many other opportunities for distribution and exhibition in the UK. For example tours of short films made by British film makers such as: ‘The UKFC's 'Big Stories/Small Flashes' took nine films made under the Digital Shorts scheme to 30 cinemas around the UK in 2003’. In addition DVD collections of British short films under the UKFC have also started to become popular in the industry. Festivals have also taken place over several years to showcase these DVD’s, such as Cinema 16 put together by Luke Morris, and encounters festival which was held in Bristol. Web streaming has also been an important way for short film makers to reach further audiences on a global and national scale, for example UK based company “Atom Films currently offers a Hi-Def programme where broadband users can download free Maven software that allows films to be viewed full screen, at what Atom claims to be near-DVD quality”.
The limitations of the format (what, according to some, can’t shorts achieve that features can?)

• One main limitation of short films, is that in some short films, only one short idea is presented, which is sometimes just a simple joke, instead of conveying a story or problem within the film, like features. In addition, it is hard for shorts to be distributed on the same scale as feature films, due to funding of advertising, and the awareness of short films.

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

• Overall the writer of the article summarises the high points and low points of short films at the time. The article shows how short film making is on an up, due to the rise and use of the format of web streaming, the increasing support organisations like the film council have given to aid short films, such as festivals and showcases. However the article, talks about the difficulties short film making went through. Due to reasons such as popularity and funding. Though overall, the article sights that short film making and the popularity the format is gaining is increasing.

 How up-to-date you think the article is? (Providing reasons)

• Overall the article is not entirely up to date with the current UK short film scene, due to different schemes and opportunities being given to short film makers through bigger companies, such as Virgin Media, rather than only organisations such as the UK film council. In addition, the use of experimentation possible with the DV format has increased, due to more software and easier access to home software packages rising. 

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

·         How do they compare/contrast with the BFI article?