What to do with a mediocre short film
I have a fifteen-minute short film I wrote and directed about a year ago as a student project. It has a strong concept, but one that requires viewing all the way to the end to get. Unfortunately, the execution is not so hot. Having gained a year’s distance on the project, I can now see several problems with the acting, pacing, and writing. This view is backed up by the fact that the film’s been rejected by the majority of the festivals it was submitted to. In screenings, there is often inappropriate laughter in the beginning and middle, but the film consistently “gets” people in the end — there’s a bit of a twist ending, and people seem to find the resolution and overall concept satisfying.
Given the film’s problems, at this point I’m embarrassed to even show it around anymore. My question is, should I follow my instincts and just bury it away, focusing instead on spec scripts and potentially other shorts? Or is there still some value in a short with a good concept but poor execution? It represents a fair amount of money and a lot of dedication by a good crew, so I figured it was worth asking.
– Jeff
Michigan
Bury it. As much as you hope people will see through the poor execution, they won’t. They can’t. That’s one of the most frustrating things about screenwriting: the final film may or may not reflect the quality of the writing underneath. (Yet we give awards for “Best Screenplay” based on the movie, not the script. Discuss.)
If there’s an idea that really is phenomenal at the heart of the short, you’re better off writing it as a script again.
Articles
November 14th, 2007 at 6:23 am
Any chance of re-shooting?
November 14th, 2007 at 6:43 am
… or re-editing.
I’ll bet you four dollars that you can make it worth showing by tightening it up to the bare minimum, telling as much as you possibly can without dialogue, and adding some great original music (if you happen to know a generous musician or two).
November 14th, 2007 at 7:40 am
Let it go! Don’t let it hold you back…and it will if you don’t let it go. You’ve learned from it–use that to make your next project even better. (Maybe someday– years from now –you’ll be working on something and this old idea will pop into your head and you’ll know it fits.) But the way I see it is it’s just not realistic to expect to be able to “sell” everything I do. Sometimes I just have to get the junk cleared outof my head/life for the good stuff to make an appearance.
November 14th, 2007 at 7:59 am
Any chance of re-editing? Tightening up those loose places?
November 14th, 2007 at 8:36 am
We’ve been down the path before where we futz with reshoots and include VO and re-edits. The only reason we felt compelled to complete the project was other people were in need of the credit and copy. The actors and crew worked very hard, so the deserved something in return. In the end, we came up with something we we’re not ashamed of, but not proud of either.
You said it was student project. Take the lessons learned, albeit expensive ones and move on. Among the many lessons we learned, were that you can’t go back and fix major flaws.
November 14th, 2007 at 8:37 am
I agree with John. Although it’s not the end of the world. I think you might feel quite refreshed rewriting the script and maybe adding some more substance to it. I wrote a script when I was 18 that had a good concept, but poor writing. I am 26 now and I am rewriting it. Let me tell you it feels great to take a fresh approach at the old material. You might be sad to let the film go, but ultimately you might create something great from the source material. Good Luck!
November 14th, 2007 at 8:38 am
How about re-editing or a combination of editing and shooting new footage to fill in the gaps?
I would hate to see all of that work go to waste, especially since others who were involved may want to use your film as a calling card for their talents.
November 14th, 2007 at 8:46 am
One of my early writing mentors once told me to never try to justify the time (or money) you spent on something. If it doesn’t work, it doesn’t work. Accept it, learn what you can from the experience and move on.
As tough as it may be, burying it sounds like the right path. As long as you took some good lessons from the experience, consider it a line item in the cost of your filmmaking education - I have a few of those myself, so I know what it’s like!
November 14th, 2007 at 9:44 am
Experience is good, for sure, but sometimes the end product is not. Take what you learned from it and make another one, a better one, and be proud of what you’re showing.
I mean, if you can’t show it without being embarrassed, why should other people want to see it?
November 14th, 2007 at 10:16 am
Jeff,
John is correct. Leave it behind. Focus on spec scripts–they’re more valuable commodities as far as the business is concerned, and they don’t cost you any money to create, just time.
And if you’re still in Michigan, move to LA. S’not gonna happen for you out there.
November 14th, 2007 at 10:32 am
I’m with the guy with the face icon (#1), re-write and re-shoot the thing. It’s called rapid prototyping in the software business. Build a quick and dirty system, see what works, what doesn’t then throw it all out and start fresh with only the knowledge gained.
If re-doing the whole thing is not an option, the bury it and shoot something else.
November 14th, 2007 at 10:45 am
Agreed as well. It’s taken me about two dozen semi-compromised short films for me to learn that lesson. Just wanted to chime in with one more point.
I’ve also found that if you have a feature script people like, in the eyes of a producer it’s better for you to not have directed anything than to have directed a short that’s not absolutely stellar.
Without seeing a directing sample, your script will be envisioned in their mind technically and artistically perfect (barring they have a decent imagination). If you show them a short with bad casting first, as they read the feature it now has bad casting too.
November 14th, 2007 at 2:25 pm
I’d refer back to an earlier lecture given by John August about professionalism. He essentially says that no one gets the chance to be mediocre because you’re always, ALWAYS being judged on the content of your work at any level. If it’s no good, then that’s what people will think of your skills.
The only answer is to KEEP GOING. I also did a short film that was less than stellar and buried it. I went back and wrote another short script, improved everything and, thus far, life is better. No worries about burying a short. All that matters is that you learn from your mistakes and make a good one after that.
November 14th, 2007 at 2:59 pm
Funny, I have a 15 minute short I made in 2005 that I liked, had some good elements…..but is waaaayyyy to long.
I have since shot another short which I love and am highly proud of.
Now that I am unemployed, I may do what I have always wanted to do with this old short and never had the time.
Cut this film to 4:30 max.
Hell of a lot cheaper and quicker than writing/directing/producing my next short…….and with 3 years of being away from this story, I will have FRESH EYES—- I may make this 15 minute good story into a 4 minute great story.
Ahhh, unemployment……..;)
November 14th, 2007 at 11:04 pm
Great advice as always John… And i love you.. Just one thing… PLEASE DON’T TELL ME WHAT TO DISCUSS AGAIN!!! I find that might be the single most arrogant thing i see on any website, though from you it’s not so bad, but just tell me something i want to know about and i will.. don’t act like you’ve given given birth to Jesus… don’t lower yourself to that level John…
Yes… I fucking hate it… I can even think of using it sarcastically…
November 15th, 2007 at 12:19 am
Chris, he’s not telling you to write anything. He’s merely suggesting. This is a blog that encourages community participation. I’m sure John suggested a discussion on the topic so that even he may be able to learn something more about it. This is a blog where you come to learn about the craft of screenwriting. A discussion on this topic would be a good place for many people to throw their observations around, and in doing so readers learn more about the profession. This is why you’re here, I presume. All this aside from the fact that a comments section is an indicator that a discussion is encouraged to ensue about all topics. I’m sure he placed the word “Discuss” there so people wouldn’t forget about the topic when they came to the comments section, because that wasn’t the post’s focus.
Also, as I’ve read many times from John, in order to be taken seriously in this world (especially this profession), you must learn how to present yourself professionally. Thus, learn how to write.
Cheers.
November 15th, 2007 at 1:27 am
Good lord, Chris. Ending a perception with “Discuss” is a common throwaway gag, taking the assertiveness out of any contentious statement by putting it into the recognisable form of an exam question.
Well, most people recognise it. They certainly know not to go off on one when they see it.
November 15th, 2007 at 3:02 am
Thank you Bruce.
I know why he put it there. Its a good idea for a topic. I would like him to expand on it, and a discussion would logically be forthcoming. I just don’t like it. It isn’t sentence unto itself. Like i originally said it is more tolerable from him, however it is one of my pet peeves, normally seen on message boards etc.
As you point out, this is a blog. so i feel the need to be up tight about my writing, my professionalism and the like to be a little redundant, I would rather relax a little and enjoy a conversation. In Johns original post about the strike the grammar nazis dismissed all. You can dismiss me if you like, but this is a blog, not a thesis, script or treatment. I hope this is a better’er wrote post, as i would not like to go unprof.
November 15th, 2007 at 12:56 pm
Just a question to everyone: How long is too long for a short? (What a weird sentence.) Is 15 minutes really too much?
Personally, I don’t mind the 15-minute mark. To me that’s about the definition of a “short.” But I can see how that would be too long for something like YouTube. Should we all be aiming for something closer to 5 or less?
November 15th, 2007 at 1:48 pm
If it was a gag then ok… i guess its a US thing as i havent heard anyone use it here in australia… just sounds arrogant… but hey as a gag its probably good.. my bad
November 15th, 2007 at 3:04 pm
19 Brendan-
I’ve heard from a festival organizer that any short over 12 minutes starts to put a crimp in their scheduling, so they become much more picky about accepting films in the 15-40 minute range. Makes sense practically speaking, but I wish they’d just accept the best films, regardless of length, and then figure out a way to schedule them.
But festivals are a business too, despite hype to the contrary. More films in a short program means more butts in the seats.
Cha-ching! $$$
November 15th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
Advice from another newbie (I’ve made only 4 shorts): I agree with John. I would add don’t waste time trying to save it because being objective- was it the execution or the script? My first one was really crap. No- super crap. No, super extra crap that I couldn’t polish. Or, as one viewer put it- “I have no idea what that was, but it made me want to watch it.” The most important thing I got from it was that I could make something that someone wanted to see even if it didn’t make any sense. I had to come to terms with that critique that it was the writing, not the directing or acting or visuals. Maybe you aren’t suppose to remake or re-edit this short, but instead learn more about the process, so that you can use it in your next short or feature?
November 15th, 2007 at 4:07 pm
Re: John’s comment that we award “Best Screenplay” based on the movie, not the script… A movie like Aliens never wins awards, but recently I read the James Cameron script on a whim. It was one hell of a read. A succeful balancing act of action and interesting characters. Most of all, every emotion I felt watching the movie is sturred up by what’s on the page. The WGA at the very least should have acknowledged that one back in the mid 80’s. If we’re going to award “Best Screenplay” for the script, somebody’s gonna have to actually read them.
November 15th, 2007 at 5:11 pm
Let it go. I wrote/produced a 15 minute short in ‘05. It got into Tribeca and a few other decent festivals (rejected at almost 60). I attended Tribeca and was even approached by a production company (I offered them a half-baked treatment for a half-good concept, so it fizzled). Other than cool schwag, I have nothing to show for it.
I’ve been sorely tempted to go to bat on another short. But I say, screw that. It’s better to pour your energy into a spec feature. People can do both, of course. But I can’t multi-task like that.
November 15th, 2007 at 9:40 pm
There’s good news and bad news here. Yes, unfortunately, you have to make sure nobody sees it. They won’t see past its flaws and they will blame you. A short film is where you prove yourself and if it’s bad, you’ve proven that you’re bad.
BUT… there’s good news. You can still tell people that you made the movie and what an impressively large production it was. People will be impressed. If they then ask to see it (most won’t), say that you’d LOVE for them to see it and you’ll get them a copy as soon as you run off some more dvds. Then they’ll cringe– Even if they genuinely wanted to see the movie, they will instantly think “oh crap, another dvd somebody wanted me to watch that I’ll never get around to watching.” You’ll never send them a dvd and they’ll be eternally grateful.
What I’m saying is, you’ll still get 90% of the credit just for making the movie, and as long as you don’t force people to watch it, people will assume it’s good and blame themselves for never getting around to seeing it.
November 16th, 2007 at 10:50 pm
Brendan’s Question: How long is too long for a short? (What a weird sentence.) Is 15 minutes really too much?>
Way too much.