Wednesday, 11 June 2008

Rejection from a festival I never sent a film to.

Don't get me wrong, I love what the people at Independent Exposure in California are doing, they even picked up my film "The Film that John Lennon couldn't make" many moons ago and put it on their distribution list making me represented by Microcinema International, and an extremely happy student filmmaker. I also did the early student thing and mucked up my NTSC transfer which at the time was done through a small box that converted Mini-DV and I sent them a b/w film when the original version was supposed to be in colour. However being that they are clearly supportive types, the film was added to their distribution list, and as I mentioned before I was a very happy student.

Now years later, I get a short film ready to send out to festivals and preempting its quick release I fill out dozens of forms, some Online and others in good old paper fashion. I'm not a big fan of Online submission procedures and the reason being is that usually you still got to send the film anyway, but it baits impulses that a few weeks later may see those few weeks turning into a few months and the deadline for actually sending the hard-copy film wafting up in a haze of "Why can't I get my shit together?"

I filled out an Online form with the intention of sending my work to Independent Exposure, and indeed the weeks turned into months. Then a reminder email popped into my Inbox stating that I hadn't actually sent them the film. Nice of them to do that, but I put it on the "Things to do" list, and ultimately it slid off that in a mire of oily hectic life.

So time passes, as does wind, as do sweaty guys make in dingy nightclubs, and I find that my film has been rejected.

"We regret to inform you that we won’t be including your work in our programming as it simply does not fit the curatorial aesthetic that the judges were looking for this year. Please understand that this doesn't mean they did like your work or think that it is of poor quality – every year our judges are different and they have vastly different tastes."

How they could have seen my work to reject it is truly quite remarkable but considering they received over 750 films and only selected 66, I have to say the clerical error lies in the enormous quantity of submissions. Who would expect each and every film to be watched? There isn't enough time on the planet, I guess the pile of synopsis was gleaned for desirable ones and the rest sent this affable email. Now the problem in this case doesn't lie at all with Independent Exposure, let me get that straight, for that is not what I am saying, and the problem only partially rests on my shoulders for not following through with the submission, but mostly the problem lies with Online entry forms.

Independent Exposure probably received 500 films and the rest were just entry forms sent Online for the convenience of a "click" and wild ambition that mizzled away as the days rolled steadily by. I still think it hilarious though that after careful consideration, the judges, after having not viewed by unsent film several times went away like 12 Angry Men, argued the case for several weeks, came back to the panel, and decided the un-film just didn't suit their tastes.

No comments:

Feed me, Seymour!

I like to watch



Creative Commons License
snuffboxfilms by rups is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.5 Australia License.
Based on written and pictorial posts at

Further reading ...

ping rss