|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
July 8th, 2007, 11:47 AM
|
#1 |
|
New Boot
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 21
|
Short Film Length
I've heard from multiple sources that if you're going to make a short film, you should make it no more than 10 minutes. In fact, as one book put it, "Make it short (under 10 minutes) or make it a feature."
I can understand this in a sense, but is there no market for say, 15-20 minute films? What's the reasoning behind this, and how do you people feel about it? |
|
|
|
July 8th, 2007, 12:48 PM
|
#2 |
|
Inner Circle
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Belfast, UK
Posts: 6,154
|
There are quite a few successful 15 minute shorts.
The reason for going for the shorter running times is that film festivals can programme in more films if they're 10 mins or less. You really do need to have an outstanding longer running time short for the festivals to want to screen it. Also, if you have a shorter running time broadcasters may buy the short as filling between programmes. Apart from that, 15 to 20 mins is an awkward length in story telling terms and most tend to drag compared to the shorter running times. In the TV market you really need 25 mins, because that's the shortest programme slot. At that running time it becomes a one off TV drama. On the Internet, being short reduces the download times. |
|
|
|
|
July 8th, 2007, 02:27 PM
|
#3 |
|
Trustee
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Brookline, MA
Posts: 1,447
|
I didn't know there was a market for shorts! Just make it as long as you need, and find a festival to suit.
|
|
|
|
|
July 8th, 2007, 03:13 PM
|
#4 | |
|
Inner Circle
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Belfast, UK
Posts: 6,154
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
|
|
