Dear Documentary Filmmakers, ever wondered why your doc didn't enter that major film fest?

The B-roll Project, is back! Every month DocMovies hosts the leading figures from the documentary and new media world. Next month Sundance will open, and we took the oportunity to talk one of the programming associates Basil Tsiokos. He has been involved in the film industry for the last 15 years, ran  NewFest: The New York LGBT Film Festival. Since 2005, he's been a Programming Associate at Sundance, focusing on US Documentary Features. Basil also works with individual documentary filmmakers and with film festivals and other organizations as a consultant on various projects.

Mr. Tsiokos shared with us his thoughts on film festivals and how new distribution models are changing the industry.

"The tweets, which usually began 'Dear Documentary Filmmakers,'initially grew out of frustration while watching various documentaries"

DM -  Basil hello and welcome to the B-roll project.

BT - Thanks for including me. I'm always thinking about film festivals,
and, this year in particular, I, like many others in the industry,
have been watching developments in distribution very closely.

DM - You wrote a guide titled "8 Documentary Dos & Don’ts From a Vet Programmer." Can you tell us about that list, and what made you write it?

BT - I occasionally write articles for indieWIRE as well, and that
particular piece actually originated as a series of tweets which also posted to my
Facebook account. When the editors at indieWIRE noted the discussions
that resulted from some of the individual tweets on Twitter and
Facebook, they approached me to flesh out my thoughts into an article
for them.

The tweets, which usually began "Dear Documentary Filmmakers,"
initially grew out of frustration while watching various documentaries
- like many artistic directors and film programmers, given the volume
of work that we watch, we see a lot of the same kinds of films and the
same kinds of approaches, and, often, the same kind of "mistakes." I
say "mistakes" because what I may view as a mistake may be a
deliberate aesthetic choice on a filmmaker's part - it's all
subjective and a matter of taste. But, in my view, many things that
filmmakers do time and time again are to the detriment of their
projects, and my Twitter series grew organically from a desire to
point out these pitfalls in the hopes that documentarians following me
might take a step back and consider the choices they were making for
their own projects. So even if some of the initial tweets were a bit
snarky, they ultimately were meant to be helpful and instructive, and,
in some way, to demystify part of what goes into the work that people
like I do.

 

"Dear Documentary Filmmaker series...offer my advice as a seasoned programmer"

DM- Since then you are continuing to give your tips on Twitter, what responses did you get?

BT - The overwhelming response I got to the article, and to my continuing
"Dear Documentary Filmmaker" series, was positive - people understood
what I was getting at, and that I didn't mean to come from a negative
place, but instead to offer my advice as a seasoned programmer. Of
course, some people took my tweets personally, incorrectly guessing
that I was somehow referring to their individual projects, but I make
it a policy to withhold enough specific information so that I am not
revealing who the filmmakers are inspiring any given tweet, what the
films are, or even necessarily for what purpose I am watching the
films.

"The problem with a lot of documentaries that utilize a great deal of talking heads is that the filmmakers often don't find an appropriate way to create visual interest"

DM - One thing that caught our attention was your reference to
"talking heads" documentaries. Is it fair to say that these types of documentaries won't get in to the leading film festivals?

Talking heads-heavy documentaries aren't immediately excluded from
major festivals - one recent, amazing film that comes to mind that
premiered at Toronto 2009 is COLLAPSE, for example, which virtually
entirely consists of an interview with one man. But what makes that
film stand out is that it's riveting - the subject is a fascinating,
complex figure, and the topics he addresses are as well. At the same
time, the film has a definite visual style - it's not just a static
shot of the interview subject for 90 minutes. Now, that's not to say
that an incredibly fascinating subject can't hold an audience's
attention even if it's a simple talking heads shot the entire time -
but it's going to be a rare subject and a rare film to do so
successfully.

The problem with a lot of documentaries that utilize a great deal of
talking heads is that the filmmakers often don't find an appropriate
way to create visual interest, even if the information that their
subjects are providing is interesting and important. For the most
part, documentary filmmakers, especially new or emerging filmmakers,
have to remember that film is a visual as well as an aural medium, and
they need to take both of those factors into account in how to shape
their material. It's not a simple question of inserting random b-roll
though - filmmakers have to determine the best way to convey the
information an interview subject provides them while still
intelligently and appropriately presenting something on the screen to
keep the audience's eyes engaged.

"The truth of the matter is that distribution deals coming out of festivals have never been very common"

DM - How do you see the current stage of film festivals, do they play the same role? It seems that their numbers are increasing each year, and as a subsequent they are declining.

BT - Film festivals are definitely finding themselves at a point where they
have to assess what their role is and what it can be, given the
radical changes of the past year or so, with smaller and arthouse
distributors shutting down, with filmmakers trying their hand at
self-distribution, and with the economic situation as it is. In many
ways, festivals have functioned as de facto exhibitors for years for
many films, and signs are out there that, at least for bigger
festivals, they will start to function more as distributors as well,
potentially acquiring some of the films that they show and using the
festival screenings to launch them into some kind of larger
distribution. Exactly how and what a festival will do in this regard
is going to be dictated by how much their infrastructure can support
these new kinds of roles, keeping in mind that the majority of
festivals are not wealthy and do not have huge year-round paid staff.
As filmmakers realize more and more that traditional distribution
models just don't work, they will turn to their festival screenings as
an important means to engage with and build up audiences and sell
merchandise/content. The festivals that are open to working with the
filmmakers in this way will find some mutually beneficial relationship
to help them survive. The ones that won't or can't will probably have
some trouble given the shrinking state of corporate sponsorship,
choosier audiences with less disposable income, and filmmakers that
may choose to bypass certain festivals to focus on ones that can work
better with their DIY distribution plans.

DM - This year it seems that many filmmakers and producers are
exploring new ways of distribution. In recent years distribution
deals coming out of film festivals have been numerous, why is
that? And how do you see joining old-fashioned grassroots
marketing with new forms of social media and networking to get
indie films out into the marketplace? For example releasing films
on iTunes right after Sundance?

BT - The truth of the matter is that distribution deals coming out of
festivals have never been very common. Even during the boom years, the
vast majority of films at a given festival, even one which is known
for acquisitions, did not sell. Films that did sell generated press
attention, of course, but if a festival has 100 or 200 features, and
only 10 or 20 sell or came in with distributors already attached, that
still means 90% of the films went without distribution, at least
immediately. Despite this, and despite theatrical releases for many of
those acquired films not being particularly profitable, or even losing
money, filmmakers have long held on to this dream of going to a major
festival and getting picked up for distribution. Slowly, this
sentiment has been eroding, so that filmmakers have started to
understand that there is more than one path to getting their films out
into the world other than a traditional theatrical.

I definitely believe that the rapid growth of social media has helped
to push this even further in the past year or so - independent
filmmakers are understanding more and more that their jobs don't end
when they lock picture. They need to budget for promotion at the
beginning of their filmmaking process, and they need to be actively
engaged with audience building/engagement and marketing in general.
Social media like Twitter and Facebook, sites like IndieGoGo and
Kickstarter - all of these have been effective or promising tools for
filmmakers from the beginnings of their projects to their attempts to
distribute. Filmmakers are learning that they have to generate
interest and awareness for their projects from the start, cultivate it
throughout the filmmaking process to build up anticipation, and create
an exchange of information and ideas to transform that potential
audience into some kind of paying audience for when the project is
ready.

I think everyone will be keeping an eye on what happens with the film
BASS ACKWARDS, which will be using its Sundance premiere to launch the
film into national release beginning the day after the festival wraps.
It's a bold move, and one that can pay off, and it speaks to many of
the things I mentioned above regarding the shifting roles of
festivals, and the DIY approaches that filmmakers have been taking in
the past year or so. I think more and more filmmakers will continue to
find new and creative ways to get their films out there rather than
waiting for a shot at the elusive traditional model.

DM - If you had to give one tip for filmmakers, what would it be?

BT - I think the most useful tip is also the most basic: before you finish
your film, make sure you have shown it to at least one person who is
not a friend, family member, or loved one - someone who can and will
give you honest, critical, and constructive feedback unclouded by any
personal connection to you. Your boyfriend/mom/sorority sister is
going to tell you that they love your film - but that really is not
going to help you get a good sense of how a stranger at a film
festival is going to engage with your film. Find someone who can react
honestly and tell you what you need to hear, not what s/he thinks you
want to hear.

I think documentary filmmakers may especially be prone to this kind of
insularity when it comes to their projects - as compared to narrative
films, which typically involve multiple collaborators if even only on
the level of the crew, documentaries can often be one-person shows,
made over many, many years, and this "labor of love" aspect can
sometimes rob a documentarian of critical distance that can come from
another person looking at their footage.

DM - Thank you again, and we wish you best of luck with future
projects.

BT - My pleasure. Your readers are encouraged to follow me on Twitter
, where I continue to post occasional "Dear Documentary Filmmakers" notes and frequently share information helpful for filmmakers regarding festivals, funding, and distribution. Documentary filmmakers may also contact me there if they are
interested in my consulting services.

< Prev		Next >