Does size really matter? Jenna Leigh answers the age-old question.
www.DirtyLittleShorts.com
www.DirtyLittleShorts.com
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Ask Jenna Leigh: Cheating
What should you do if you're cheating and you get pregnant? Ask Jenna Leigh!
www.DirtyLittleShorts.com
www.DirtyLittleShorts.com
Thursday, April 7, 2011
Film Contests: Beware the Fine Print
Someone recently posted a film contest to my Facebook page and after reading the fine print in the contest rules I felt it was my duty to blog about it so that unsuspecting filmmakers don't fall into the abyss of giving their films away for free unknowingly.
In my super-secret dayjob I deal quite a bit with sweepstakes and contest rules, so trust me: I know what I'm talking about here.
Keep in mind that when you submit to a contest or sweepstakes you are agreeing to abide by their Official Rules which everyone tends to ignore. Under normal circumstances - if you're trying to win movie tickets or a gift certificate to Bed Bath & Beyond - this wouldn't be a big deal. But this is your film we're talking about here, folks. Which you presumably spent a LONG time working on. You might want to take 30 minutes to read through the rules and see what you're getting yourself into.
A few things to watch out for if you're unfamiliar with legal ease:
Many times contests will post what are referred to as the "abbreviated rules". This is like looking at a kernal of corn and assuming that you're going to eat corn on the cob, when in reality it's one kernal of corn sitting on top of a ten-pound mound of dog crap. Read the Complete Official Rules. It's really the only way of knowing whether or not you're going to get cornholed.
When you see the words "in perpetuity" you should react in the same way that vampires in the 70s and 80s reacted to seeing a cross. It's fancy legal language that means "FOREVER AND EVER AND EVER UNTIL THE END OF TIME". So if a contest says they will have the right to use your film "in perpetuity throughout the universe", you should kiss control of your film bye-bye. And if it's accompanied by the phrase "in its sole discretion", you might still own your film, but someone else has the right to use it however they want forever and ever.
Now, I'm not saying that this is necessarily a bad thing. It depends on whether or not the payoff is worth it. Look at the prize. And, especially, read the prize paragraph. The Doritos Crash the Super Bowl Contest challenges you to create a 30 second commercial for the opportunity to potentially win $2.5 million and have your commercial aired during the Super Bowl. That's probably worth signing over the rights to your work.
The prize for the contest I was recently informed of was:
"The Top Film winner will (a) have his or her film aired on the [network name] television network and (b)receive round trip airfare between a major airport nearest to the Top Film winner's residence and Los Angeles, CA and two (2) nights hotel accommodations in Los Angeles, CA for on-ground screening of his or her film and meeting with an executive or equivalent at [network name] or other entertainment company."
Very vague. This could translate to: (a) Your film will air on the network at 3am and (b) if you live in L.A. you can forget about the airfare and hotel and (c) you'll have a "screening" of your film on an intern's laptop at a coffee shop in Silverlake and a junior junior junior "executive" (aka glorified personal assistant) will stop by to shake your hand and recommend the cheese danish.
Not worth giving up rights to your film, "in perpetuity, throughout the universe" at "our sole discretion".
Now, I may be exaggerating the result - maybe it turns out to be the big break you've been looking for and not the dour situation I described. But are you willing to gamble the rights to your film on it? I'm not. Companies purposefully word their rules vaguely so that they'll have an "out" if you're not happy with the results.
Cash prizes are the way to go. If the contest offers a cash prize, it's right there in black-and-white and there's no dispute. Now, keep in mind that they may be misleading: Doritos I believe advertised $5 million dollars in cash - which is true when you add up ALL the cash. But the MOST you can win, if you read the fine print, is $2.5 million, which is a long shot and requires several steps to accomplish. Not that I'm scoffing at it. It's a pretty big chunk o' change. Even the minimum prize is $25k, which is still - in my opinion - enough to entice me to enter the contest. Just know that the prize advertised may be a little misleading.
[OK, I just realized this is a bigger topic than I can cover in one blog entry, so...TO BE CONTINUED...]
In my super-secret dayjob I deal quite a bit with sweepstakes and contest rules, so trust me: I know what I'm talking about here.
Keep in mind that when you submit to a contest or sweepstakes you are agreeing to abide by their Official Rules which everyone tends to ignore. Under normal circumstances - if you're trying to win movie tickets or a gift certificate to Bed Bath & Beyond - this wouldn't be a big deal. But this is your film we're talking about here, folks. Which you presumably spent a LONG time working on. You might want to take 30 minutes to read through the rules and see what you're getting yourself into.
A few things to watch out for if you're unfamiliar with legal ease:
Many times contests will post what are referred to as the "abbreviated rules". This is like looking at a kernal of corn and assuming that you're going to eat corn on the cob, when in reality it's one kernal of corn sitting on top of a ten-pound mound of dog crap. Read the Complete Official Rules. It's really the only way of knowing whether or not you're going to get cornholed.
When you see the words "in perpetuity" you should react in the same way that vampires in the 70s and 80s reacted to seeing a cross. It's fancy legal language that means "FOREVER AND EVER AND EVER UNTIL THE END OF TIME". So if a contest says they will have the right to use your film "in perpetuity throughout the universe", you should kiss control of your film bye-bye. And if it's accompanied by the phrase "in its sole discretion", you might still own your film, but someone else has the right to use it however they want forever and ever.
Now, I'm not saying that this is necessarily a bad thing. It depends on whether or not the payoff is worth it. Look at the prize. And, especially, read the prize paragraph. The Doritos Crash the Super Bowl Contest challenges you to create a 30 second commercial for the opportunity to potentially win $2.5 million and have your commercial aired during the Super Bowl. That's probably worth signing over the rights to your work.
The prize for the contest I was recently informed of was:
"The Top Film winner will (a) have his or her film aired on the [network name] television network and (b)receive round trip airfare between a major airport nearest to the Top Film winner's residence and Los Angeles, CA and two (2) nights hotel accommodations in Los Angeles, CA for on-ground screening of his or her film and meeting with an executive or equivalent at [network name] or other entertainment company."
Very vague. This could translate to: (a) Your film will air on the network at 3am and (b) if you live in L.A. you can forget about the airfare and hotel and (c) you'll have a "screening" of your film on an intern's laptop at a coffee shop in Silverlake and a junior junior junior "executive" (aka glorified personal assistant) will stop by to shake your hand and recommend the cheese danish.
Not worth giving up rights to your film, "in perpetuity, throughout the universe" at "our sole discretion".
Now, I may be exaggerating the result - maybe it turns out to be the big break you've been looking for and not the dour situation I described. But are you willing to gamble the rights to your film on it? I'm not. Companies purposefully word their rules vaguely so that they'll have an "out" if you're not happy with the results.
Cash prizes are the way to go. If the contest offers a cash prize, it's right there in black-and-white and there's no dispute. Now, keep in mind that they may be misleading: Doritos I believe advertised $5 million dollars in cash - which is true when you add up ALL the cash. But the MOST you can win, if you read the fine print, is $2.5 million, which is a long shot and requires several steps to accomplish. Not that I'm scoffing at it. It's a pretty big chunk o' change. Even the minimum prize is $25k, which is still - in my opinion - enough to entice me to enter the contest. Just know that the prize advertised may be a little misleading.
[OK, I just realized this is a bigger topic than I can cover in one blog entry, so...TO BE CONTINUED...]
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Remembrances of Dennis Hopper
As are many people, I'm very saddened by the passing of Dennis Hopper and it brought to mind my one encounter I had with him that I thought I'd share:
My short film, FILTHY FOOD, screened in competition at CineVegas 2007 - an awesome film festival that I highly recommend to everyone. Dennis Hopper was the Chairman of that festival so he was constantly popping in and out at screenings and parties. I met him briefly at a party, but didn't really talk to him. He was well-chaperoned by members of the festival staff who would guide him away from riff-raff like me so that I couldn't annoy him by asking him to be in my next movie. Understandable.
But I was lucky enough to be invited to a super-secret last-minute "filmmaker only" screening of BLUE VELVET with Mr. Hopper in attendance. Of course I was completely geeked-out about it and didn't care that I'd been up till 4am that morning with the screening at 10am the same morning. I was, however, pretty mortified that the cheese danish I ate that morning didn't agree with me and my stomach was gurgling throughout the entire pre-screening Q&A. It was embarrassing enough to keep me from asking him any questions. Well, that and the fact that I'd already read about most of what he was sharing with us.
There were maybe 15 of us in the theater (at most) and Mr. Hopper was gracious and accommodating (if not somewhat shy) in sharing his experiences about working on a film that I'm sure he'd grown sick of answering questions about over the past 25 years. He told the usual stories of how he'd landed the iconic role of Frank by calling David Lynch on the phone while he was having lunch with Laura Dern (or was it Kyle MacLachlan?) and telling him that he WAS Frank Booth and that Lynch would have to cast him in the part; and that the original script called for him to inhale helium which he thought was silly, so (knowing a thing-or-two about drugs) he suggested amyl nitrate to Lynch because it induced a sort of trance-like euphoria which seemed more appropriate for the character.
But there was one question he answered that really stuck with me that I had never heard about in any trivia about BLUE VELVET: Someone asked how he got into character for the role of Frank Booth. He thought about it for a second and said, "I don't know. I was really just trying to stay sober at the time so I really don't remember." This struck me as incredibly honest, courageous, human and, as someone who has struggled with similar demons, I found it quite inspiring. I really admired him for saying that. He didn't make a big deal about it - the moment flashed by in an instant - and I'd bet that only two of the maybe-15 people that were there even remembered that he had said it, but I thought it was pretty cool.
So, although I didn't know Dennis Hopper and I can barely say I met the man, I can say that he had a profound affect on me at that particular moment in time and I'll never forget it.
Plus he didn't say anything about the deafening sound of cheese danish gurgling around in my stomach, so that was cool. I mean, he must've heard it. It was loud.
Rest In Peace, Mr. Hopper.
-t. arthur COTTAM
My short film, FILTHY FOOD, screened in competition at CineVegas 2007 - an awesome film festival that I highly recommend to everyone. Dennis Hopper was the Chairman of that festival so he was constantly popping in and out at screenings and parties. I met him briefly at a party, but didn't really talk to him. He was well-chaperoned by members of the festival staff who would guide him away from riff-raff like me so that I couldn't annoy him by asking him to be in my next movie. Understandable.
But I was lucky enough to be invited to a super-secret last-minute "filmmaker only" screening of BLUE VELVET with Mr. Hopper in attendance. Of course I was completely geeked-out about it and didn't care that I'd been up till 4am that morning with the screening at 10am the same morning. I was, however, pretty mortified that the cheese danish I ate that morning didn't agree with me and my stomach was gurgling throughout the entire pre-screening Q&A. It was embarrassing enough to keep me from asking him any questions. Well, that and the fact that I'd already read about most of what he was sharing with us.
There were maybe 15 of us in the theater (at most) and Mr. Hopper was gracious and accommodating (if not somewhat shy) in sharing his experiences about working on a film that I'm sure he'd grown sick of answering questions about over the past 25 years. He told the usual stories of how he'd landed the iconic role of Frank by calling David Lynch on the phone while he was having lunch with Laura Dern (or was it Kyle MacLachlan?) and telling him that he WAS Frank Booth and that Lynch would have to cast him in the part; and that the original script called for him to inhale helium which he thought was silly, so (knowing a thing-or-two about drugs) he suggested amyl nitrate to Lynch because it induced a sort of trance-like euphoria which seemed more appropriate for the character.
But there was one question he answered that really stuck with me that I had never heard about in any trivia about BLUE VELVET: Someone asked how he got into character for the role of Frank Booth. He thought about it for a second and said, "I don't know. I was really just trying to stay sober at the time so I really don't remember." This struck me as incredibly honest, courageous, human and, as someone who has struggled with similar demons, I found it quite inspiring. I really admired him for saying that. He didn't make a big deal about it - the moment flashed by in an instant - and I'd bet that only two of the maybe-15 people that were there even remembered that he had said it, but I thought it was pretty cool.
So, although I didn't know Dennis Hopper and I can barely say I met the man, I can say that he had a profound affect on me at that particular moment in time and I'll never forget it.
Plus he didn't say anything about the deafening sound of cheese danish gurgling around in my stomach, so that was cool. I mean, he must've heard it. It was loud.
Rest In Peace, Mr. Hopper.
-t. arthur COTTAM
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Festival Fee Waiver Douchiness
"Am I a douche if I ask for a fee waiver from a film festival?"
This question was posed to a well-known blogger from a "respectable" independent film organization. Her answer was "Yes", you are a douche. Um. OK. I whole-heartedly disagree. And I couldn't sit idly by and read this without commenting and putting this into perspective for us filmmakers living in the real world.
First off, the answer is "No", you are not a douche if you ask for a fee waiver from a film festival. You're a douche if you ask in a douchey way and expect them to say "Yes". Now, the people running film festivals are big boys and can decide whether or not to grant you a fee waiver. Often they deny your request and then you have to decide whether or not you want to pay the fee. If you get indignant with the festival and act like an a-hole about it when they deny your fee waiver request then, yeah, that's pretty douchey. But, no, it's not douchey to ask for a fee waiver. I do it all the time. And more often than not, the fee is gladly waived. Now keep in mind that most of the waivers I ask for are from festivals that have previously screened my work and it is customary for festivals to waive fees in those instances. If you're just starting out, you should expect to pay a lot of entry fees. That's the unfortunate reality.
Now, there is the rare instance of a fee NOT getting waived by a festival that has previously shown your work. That is douchey. Beyond douchey. This has only happened to me twice (that I can remember) and I won't mention names, but one of the festivals was pretty BUFF and the other one just happens to take place where that giant hippy music festival happened in the 60s. Damned hippies.
Let's keep something in mind here: I'm not bashing festivals. I love festivals. Festivals have expenses. They have to rent a venue to show the films. They have to print programs. They have to print tickets. They have to pay a projectionist. They have to rent a projector. And these are just the bare minimum expenses that I know about - I'm sure there are many many many more, depending on the festival. And keep in mind that festivals are taking a HUGE risk when programming your work: They are literally banking on people attending screenings based on the quality of your film and your ability to draw a crowd. I love festivals and hope that they continue to make money and thrive and survive so that I have a venue to show my films in front of a live audience.
BUT
If a festival is relying on MY entry fee to run their festival, it's generally not a very well-run festival. The better festivals have sponsors and advertisers that cover the bulk of their costs. They don't rely solely on entry fees. And they are savvy enough to seek out and program films that will cater to their audiences. Audiences that they've built over the years by being well-run, well-programmed festivals. And, unless it's a festival that puts on free screenings, these festivals are generally charging regular movie ticket prices to show your films. So festivals have a few sources of revenue to draw from.
Sadly, CineVegas isn't happening in 2010 which is a real shame because they are one of the great film festivals. But they decided that they couldn't raise the funds to pull off the kind of quality festival that their audiences and filmmakers have become accustomed to. Now, did they put the burden on the filmmakers by raising entry fees or telling alumni filmmakers that they couldn't waive fees this year? No. They did the respectable thing and just postponed the festival for a year. This obviously isn't ideal, but I use it as an example of how a well-run festival doesn't rely on submission fees to pay for their festival.
In 2008 when DIRTY WORDS: The Letter C was doing the festival circuit most of the festival directors I talked to were disappointed because of the sad state of the economy which had diminished their sponsorship funds which forced them to scale back their operations. Not a single festival director told me they were forced to scale back because their submissions were down and they weren't making enough money from submission fees.
Catch my drift?
Festival entry fees average around $35 each. If you submit to 100 film festivals, that's $3500! At Dirty Little Shorts the average budget of our films is $200. At Misfit Films the average budget of our feature films is $5000. I'm glad the blogger I mentioned has lots of money to throw around at festivals--more power to her--but some of us could make another film for the money we would potentially be spending on entry fees.
And, by the way, entry fees are mostly a U.S. phenomenon. Most European and Asian film festivals don't charge an entry fee (with the exception of Great Britain). Granted, most of them are government subsidised, but most also offer prize money which is a big incentive to submit. Most U.S. film festivals don't offer prize money.
So I call shenanigans on the idea that asking for fee waivers is douchey.
A fellow filmmaker suggested this (which I thought was pretty brilliant): Ask festivals if they'd be willing to waive the fee contingent upon your acceptance into the festival. If your film is accepted into the festival, you'll pay the entry fee. It hasn't worked for me the few times I've proposed it, but apparently it's worked for her.
All they can do is say "No", right?
Having said that: Always be courteous and respectful. You're dealing with human beings here. Most of them are really nice, reasonable, intelligent human beings, too. No one wants to waive the fee for a douche. Let alone programming the film of a douchey filmmaker.
But I couldn't let some blogger accuse me of being a douche for asking for fee waivers without speaking up and letting y'all know the real deal from my own douchey perspective.
xo
-t.
This question was posed to a well-known blogger from a "respectable" independent film organization. Her answer was "Yes", you are a douche. Um. OK. I whole-heartedly disagree. And I couldn't sit idly by and read this without commenting and putting this into perspective for us filmmakers living in the real world.
First off, the answer is "No", you are not a douche if you ask for a fee waiver from a film festival. You're a douche if you ask in a douchey way and expect them to say "Yes". Now, the people running film festivals are big boys and can decide whether or not to grant you a fee waiver. Often they deny your request and then you have to decide whether or not you want to pay the fee. If you get indignant with the festival and act like an a-hole about it when they deny your fee waiver request then, yeah, that's pretty douchey. But, no, it's not douchey to ask for a fee waiver. I do it all the time. And more often than not, the fee is gladly waived. Now keep in mind that most of the waivers I ask for are from festivals that have previously screened my work and it is customary for festivals to waive fees in those instances. If you're just starting out, you should expect to pay a lot of entry fees. That's the unfortunate reality.
Now, there is the rare instance of a fee NOT getting waived by a festival that has previously shown your work. That is douchey. Beyond douchey. This has only happened to me twice (that I can remember) and I won't mention names, but one of the festivals was pretty BUFF and the other one just happens to take place where that giant hippy music festival happened in the 60s. Damned hippies.
Let's keep something in mind here: I'm not bashing festivals. I love festivals. Festivals have expenses. They have to rent a venue to show the films. They have to print programs. They have to print tickets. They have to pay a projectionist. They have to rent a projector. And these are just the bare minimum expenses that I know about - I'm sure there are many many many more, depending on the festival. And keep in mind that festivals are taking a HUGE risk when programming your work: They are literally banking on people attending screenings based on the quality of your film and your ability to draw a crowd. I love festivals and hope that they continue to make money and thrive and survive so that I have a venue to show my films in front of a live audience.
BUT
If a festival is relying on MY entry fee to run their festival, it's generally not a very well-run festival. The better festivals have sponsors and advertisers that cover the bulk of their costs. They don't rely solely on entry fees. And they are savvy enough to seek out and program films that will cater to their audiences. Audiences that they've built over the years by being well-run, well-programmed festivals. And, unless it's a festival that puts on free screenings, these festivals are generally charging regular movie ticket prices to show your films. So festivals have a few sources of revenue to draw from.
Sadly, CineVegas isn't happening in 2010 which is a real shame because they are one of the great film festivals. But they decided that they couldn't raise the funds to pull off the kind of quality festival that their audiences and filmmakers have become accustomed to. Now, did they put the burden on the filmmakers by raising entry fees or telling alumni filmmakers that they couldn't waive fees this year? No. They did the respectable thing and just postponed the festival for a year. This obviously isn't ideal, but I use it as an example of how a well-run festival doesn't rely on submission fees to pay for their festival.
In 2008 when DIRTY WORDS: The Letter C was doing the festival circuit most of the festival directors I talked to were disappointed because of the sad state of the economy which had diminished their sponsorship funds which forced them to scale back their operations. Not a single festival director told me they were forced to scale back because their submissions were down and they weren't making enough money from submission fees.
Catch my drift?
Festival entry fees average around $35 each. If you submit to 100 film festivals, that's $3500! At Dirty Little Shorts the average budget of our films is $200. At Misfit Films the average budget of our feature films is $5000. I'm glad the blogger I mentioned has lots of money to throw around at festivals--more power to her--but some of us could make another film for the money we would potentially be spending on entry fees.
And, by the way, entry fees are mostly a U.S. phenomenon. Most European and Asian film festivals don't charge an entry fee (with the exception of Great Britain). Granted, most of them are government subsidised, but most also offer prize money which is a big incentive to submit. Most U.S. film festivals don't offer prize money.
So I call shenanigans on the idea that asking for fee waivers is douchey.
A fellow filmmaker suggested this (which I thought was pretty brilliant): Ask festivals if they'd be willing to waive the fee contingent upon your acceptance into the festival. If your film is accepted into the festival, you'll pay the entry fee. It hasn't worked for me the few times I've proposed it, but apparently it's worked for her.
All they can do is say "No", right?
Having said that: Always be courteous and respectful. You're dealing with human beings here. Most of them are really nice, reasonable, intelligent human beings, too. No one wants to waive the fee for a douche. Let alone programming the film of a douchey filmmaker.
But I couldn't let some blogger accuse me of being a douche for asking for fee waivers without speaking up and letting y'all know the real deal from my own douchey perspective.
xo
-t.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
And then there were 2...
Hey, "how come I haven't seen any postings to this blog in a while", you ask? Well, for a few reasons:
1. We're busy making movies.
2. All but 2 of our Misfits have "left the building" so-to-speak.
3. Realizing the importance of indie filmmakers needing a web presence, we're trying to figure out the most time-efficient way to link Blogger, Twitter, Facebook, Myspace and our website (www.misfitFILMS.com) together and since we lost all of our interns, we old foggies are fumbling around in the dark like monkeys trying to fuck footballs.
So there you have it... But we will endeavor to persevere and continue posting to this blog on a semi-regular basis to keep you updated on what we're doing here at Misfit Films World Headquarters. Making movies. Fucking footballs.
1. We're busy making movies.
2. All but 2 of our Misfits have "left the building" so-to-speak.
3. Realizing the importance of indie filmmakers needing a web presence, we're trying to figure out the most time-efficient way to link Blogger, Twitter, Facebook, Myspace and our website (www.misfitFILMS.com) together and since we lost all of our interns, we old foggies are fumbling around in the dark like monkeys trying to fuck footballs.
So there you have it... But we will endeavor to persevere and continue posting to this blog on a semi-regular basis to keep you updated on what we're doing here at Misfit Films World Headquarters. Making movies. Fucking footballs.
Friday, March 6, 2009
The Results Are In...
Bake off Friday turned out to be awesome. The catty attitudes of Amy and Norman filled every corner of Misfit Studios. It started with Norman baking first. To the table he brought the old fashion chocolate chip cookie. The sweet smell of Norman and his delicious treats and his cookies were all we could smell all day. The oven timer beeps and we start to inhale cookies. We were swearing off Mrs. Fields with crumbs spitting from our faces. Norman's cookies were sooo good it made T. drool. My juices from my noise started leaking and I knew these cookies were going to be tough to beat.
Amy steps into the ring, well actually, the kitchen. She had her competitive face on and didn't even break a sweat. She pops in the cookies with a confident smile and glares over at Norman.
"Fuck you Norman." Her language appalls us. She is a feisty little one.
Her cookies made us fly like magical ponies. One bite into them and hints of orange grind exploded into our palettes. Amy was a tough contender, but in the end, Norman takes the cake. I'm sorry that was gay... but so is Norman so I guess gay is okay.
Norman, Misfit salutes you. You are the cookie queen of this studio.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
