The Free Rider Problem and Film Festival Entry Fees

 

Filmmakers lament that film festivals gouge them with high entry fees. It's true that fees are often excessive. Many festivals seem to exist solely to profit from filmmakers' desperation for an IMDB listing. They scream "IMDB Eligible Award!" on their websites and in their SEO gimmickry.

But apart from subsidizing the festival, entry fees also filter out inappropriate or poorly made films. They thus solve the Free Rider Problem as it pertains to film festivals. (The exception are the vanity festivals that award every entry in exchange for inordinately high fees; this article does not pertain to them.)

Search Assist AI defines the Free Rider Problem as "an economic issue where individuals benefit from resources, goods, or services without paying for them, leading to underfunding and potential degradation of those resources." I confronted this problem firsthand when my own festival became free and easy to enter in 2014.

Ten years previously, I had founded the Tabloid Witch Awards as a No Entry Fee horror film contest. But while there was no fee, entrants still had to submit hard copies of films (VHS or DVD) to a P.O. Box. Thus effort and expense were required, if only the cost of a blank tape and postage. And so filmmakers only submitted works they thought had a shot at winning. (Although one intrepid fellow submitted his entire oeuvre of 23 DVDs, shorts and features of various genres, going back a decade.)

Granted, some of these filmmakers had unrealistic ideas of their films' merit, but as I would learn, they were not scrapping the bottom of their barrels. That changed in 2014.

That was the year FilmFreeway introduced their online film submission platform. Withoutabox had invented the online submission process in 2000, but FilmFreeway perfected it. Many filmmakers hated Withoutabox. FilmFreeway apparently listened. (I quote filmmakers' complaints about Withoutabox in my book, Horror Film Festivals and Awards.)

The technology had also advanced since 2000. By 2014, online streaming was a thing. FilmFreeway enabled filmmakers to upload their films, search for festivals, and submit their works, all online. No more mailing hard copies.

I enrolled the Tabloid Witch Awards with FilmFreeway from its inception, February 2014. I had never used Withoutabox. When I joined FilmFreeway, I maintained my No Entry Fee policy.

And the floodgates opened. A tsunami of submissions. Multiple submissions an hour, every hour. I was buried under submissions. I had to end it. I imposed a $10 entry fee. Not a high fee, but enough to stem the tide.

And here is where the Free Rider Problem arises. Had the entries been mostly decent horror films, all well and good. The more, the merrier. But the majority of submissions were either inappropriate or of home video quality. People were submitting political documentaries, romances, religious/inspirational films, everything. Somebody submitted four PDF scripts for an unproduced TV series. (The Tabloid Witch has no script category.) Another submitted several poorly made VHS home movies that had already been streaming on YouTube for many years. But hey, no entry fee. Let's give it a shot!

I saw the problem. FilmFreeway allows filmmakers to search festivals by criteria. Many filmmakers were searching for "all festivals with no entry fee." Then they'd "click to enter" every festival that came up. Instant submission! No cost, no fuss! But without considering the festival's requirements or whether their films had any merit. Hey, no entry fee! What have I got to lose?

It was part laziness, part desperation. Too lazy to read the requirements for the festivals in the search results. Desperation, because these filmmakers thought, Yeah, I know my film isn't a fit for many of these festivals, but you never know. Maybe someone on the other end will love my film and make an exception, or knows someone who's looking for my type of film.

And so after ten years (2004-14), the Tabloid Witch ceased being a No Entry Fee event. No more free riders. Which means I no longer receive as many films, but those I do receive are mostly appropriate and well made. Filmmakers will submit anything for free, but submit thoughtfully when spending their own money.

If you've ever wondered why filmmakers can't have nice things, now you know. Because Billy was bad, the whole class had to be punished.

How to Win at Horror Film Festivals

The below article originally appeared in 2006, in Indie Slate magazine. That was nearly 20 years ago, but the advice still holds true.

================== 

I'm in my third year of reviewing films for the Tabloid Witch Awards, sponsored by the Hollywood Investigator. It's an easy contest to enter; any short or feature length horror film is eligible, no entry fee required. Thus, I've received entries from across the spectrum of experience, from camcorder hobbyists, to film students, to professionals. I also see the same recurring mistakes among the losing films. Yet they're easy enough to avoid. Follow the below rules, and your film should be far more competitive in any festival you enter. 

1. Writing Counts

"If it ain't on the page, it ain't on the stage." If you insist on writing your own script, you must study the art of storytelling as seriously as you'd study your camera. Too many filmmakers think screenwriting is only about format. Too many directors want to be "auteurs" and write their own scripts without learning the art of storytelling.

If you're not a writer, and don't plan on learning the craft, then find someone who is. Successful directors often film someone else's screenplay. There's no shame in it. Poor writing creates many problems, such as...

2. A Vignette Is Not a Story

I've seen too many entries that confuse the two. "X rises from the grave and kills Y. The End," or "Zombies eat people. The End." Nor should you rely on a (often predictable) twist. "X is a serial killer who dates Y who turns out to be a vampire. The End." I've probably seen over a thousand horror films and TV shows so I know every "surprise" ending. Festival screeners tend to be well-versed in cinema history, especially in their festival's genre, so don't rely on your film's ending. You need more. Tell a story. And if you don't know what that is, see Rule 1.

3. Keep It Short and Sweet

Even a good film can be ruined by fat. Rich Mauro trimmed Mole to its perfect length. Distributors had advised Mauro that a one hour feature was a hard sell, but Mauro chose the best length for his tale of reporters seeking "mole people" in the abandoned subway tunnels under Manhattan. And it worked. Apart from winning a Tabloid Witch for Best Horror Feature Film (and Best Actress, and Best Supporting Actor), Mole also found distribution as part of a four film horror DVD package.

Jamie Renee Williams's Slinky Milk (Honorable Mention), a black and white surreal film reminiscent of Un Chien Andalou, was intriguing at its five minutes. Were it a half hour, it would have overstayed itswelcome.

I've seen many losing entries that would have been stronger at half their lengths — films sabotaged by overlong expository shots, or directors in love with shots that fail to contribute to the story, or characters wandering around or engaging in pointless chatter.

If a line is unnecessary to the story, don't say it. And if a line is necessary, say it in a way that's sharp, funny, clever, intriguing, memorable, or interesting. Dialogue should reveal character or move the story forward. Characters should not sound alike. Vapid chatter that achieves nothing may sound realistic, but banal banter makes for a dull film.

4. Acting Counts

Acting quality was the single biggest element separating winning films from the losers. Actors who are wooden, self-conscious, affectatious, or chew scenery can tank an otherwise decent film. I rejected one film that did a decent job of recreating the 1860s, in costumes and furnishings, only to populate this period piece with some painfully bad acting. There's no excuse for this. Big cities teem with trained actors willing to work cheap, or even for free. And even small towns usually have a college or community theater with trained actors.

Of course, I've also seen horror "parodies" in which I suspect the director thought his bad cast was an asset. Wrong. An amateurish cast rarely produces a film that's "so bad it's good," but more often a film that's "so bad it's unwatchable."

If you still insist on casting your friends and family, insist they get professional training. Seriously. Otherwise, you're shooting a home movie, and home movies can rarely compete against polished work. 

5. It Doesn't End With the Shoot

Mole, Legion, and Human No More all underwent extensive post-production to optimize their camera footage. The results were beautiful, with Legion (Best Horror Short Film, Best Visuals, and Best Supporting Actress) resembling such studio fare as Lost Souls in its dark and moody cinematography. On the low end of the scale, many losing entries had a flat "home video" look: poorly lit, with dull, fading colors. Yet post-production needn't be prohibitively expensive. Human No More achieved its impressive visuals with Final Cut Pro. 

6. Sound Counts

George Lucas understood this, which is why he founded Skywalker Sound. Christopher Alan Broadstone also understands this, which is why his Human No More (Best Sound, Best Actor, and an Honorable Mention) is a densely layered audio feast. And he did it with off-the-shelf computer programs like Bias Sound Soap and Bias Peak 4. It didn't require much money, only much effort. 

7. Rule Are Guidelines

Rules can be broken. Human No More is a vignette rather than a story. And Slinky Milk has no story and no trained actors. But Broadstone's film remains powerful because of its artistry and originality; and Williams's experimental genre doesn't require a story or acting.

Even so, rules are rules because they usually work. Violating them is a risk that rarely pays off. 

8. Entertain Us

While skillfully shot and acted, Cadaverous and SuperStore are conventional horror tales of no great originality. Yet each won an Honorable Mention because, while we can predict their endings, these films maintain our interest. They entertain us. The writing contains no fat and the story moves at a good pace. We are not bored or driven off by an amateurish cast.

These eight rules are simple to understand, but require much study and effort to master. However, a film that is well-written, well-acted, with beautiful visuals and a clear soundtrack, and is entertaining to boot, will more likely win an award.

=================== 

Hilarious Excuse for an Entry Fee Waiver

In running the Tabloid Witch Awards, filmmakers often solicit me for entry fee waivers. Usually they plead poverty. "We spent all our money making the best film possible, so we have nothing left for entry fees."

Okay. Not plausible -- I assume they're still paying rent, buying food, maybe even enjoying coffee at Starbucks -- but okay.

But a filmmaker recently sent me an email with a fairly novel -- and hilarious -- excuse:

"This project is a fully independent, self-produced work that was created without any external funding, commercial intent, or monetization. A fundamental principle of this film is that it remains entirely non-commercial -- this is not just a financial necessity, but a conscious artistic and ideological decision.

"For this reason, I am unable to pay submission fees, as doing so would contradict the very nature of the project. I kindly ask if you can offer a full fee waiver, allowing [redacted] to be considered in alignment with its non-commercial ethos."

Incidentally, this was obviously a mass mailing. I get many of those. Emails asking for waivers without mentioning my name or festival -- and submitting films that are inappropriate (e.g. submitting social dramas or romantic comedies to a horror film festival).

Festival directors don't like these junk mass mailings. But I suppose a handful of festivals might grant a waiver, so the filmmaker doesn't care if he annoys a few thousand others.

=================