A Peek Behind the Festival Programming Curtain

Festival programming is often bewildering:  how and why a festival chooses to program one film as opposed another is a crazy mix of curation, personal relationships, local (and, in some cases, national) audience tastes, previous experience, publicity potential and, oh yeah, quality.

With all the changes going on at festivals this past year (the latest being Geoffrey Gilmore's exit from Sundance for Tribeca, which we will cover in more depth shortly), the goings-on in festival programming offices can sometimes seem even more confusing.

How, for example, would Janet Pierson combine her own tastes with the successful SXSW programming of past director Matt Dentler?  How will Sadie Tillery put her own fingerprint on Full Frame this year?  What will the shuttering of BritDoc mean for Sheffield?

Luckily, Pierson has done a few interviews with folks talking about her choices for this year (one was here, another was with Eugene at indieWIRE), giving us a sense of where she might take the fest.  We hope to be doing a couple more of these with programmers over the next few weeks.

In the meantime, my massive blog crush on seafar, Hot Docs' programmer Sean Farnel's blog, continues unabated.  He's been writing at length about his process in selecting titles for this year's festival, and it's a primer that any filmmaker should read.  Currently, there are a series of 6 posts, each a weekly update into one programmer's decision making.

In summary:

Week One:

"We, the Hot Docs programming team and I, are looking for about 175 films which are appropriate. Not for a six-year-old, but for our smart, generous, curious Hot Docs audience, which includes the international industry that attends our event looking for “product.” More than 2000 films will be viewed, the vast majority of them at least twice. We won’t watch ALL of ALL of the films. Sorry.

But, we will cull our submission shelves as thoroughly and thoughtfully as any film festival in the world. On this point, I’m obsessive. Filmmakers pay submission fees (which only cover a portion of properly administrating an unsolicited submissions process) with the expectation that the work they’ve just went broke making is going to be considered by capable people." 

Week Three:

"We are now deep into the sea of submissions at Hot Docs, and at last count there are 225 films on the Short List (also called, internally, “The Prog List”…as it is at TIFF, from where the term migrated). It will get longer before it gets shorter. We have two weeks of HEAVY screening, then Berlin, then we shape this big mound of documentary clay into a semi-coherent film festival."

Week Four:

"Once we have a big list of work to which we responded positively, the following questions inform our decisions…

RIGOUR: Does the programme have curatorial rigour, creativity, and innovation? Or, are a we lazily picking the low hanging fruit? Are we taking risks, championing the margins, pushing boundaries and sensibilities…or are we simply drinking from the same tastemaker cup as everybody else?...

DIVERSITY: Does the programme reflect the diversity of the work that has been submitted? Formally? Culturally? Regionally? Gender? Subject Matter? Identity? Age?...

GROWTH: Does the programme expand our audience and allow us to reach and develop new audiences for documentary? Do we have enough films that draw well in our large venues? Are we reaching beyond the limits of our own tastes and biases?...

STRATEGY: Is the programme strategic in terms of our competitiveness amongst other festivals. Do our key suppliers feel included? Are we developing relationships with established AND emerging filmmakers?"

Week Five:

"I really don’t know if its better to submit a film early, or late. I do know that, given the range of choice, sometimes a decision to select one work over another is simply a matter of timing, of when we see it. Festival selections can sometimes baffle those not familiar with the process, and we all scratch our heads at certain choices festivals make. Its an intense, fast, and imperfect process….but the good work always finds its way.

As is always the case, I assume that some of the docs we really like have been submitted, and declined, elsewhere. Just as some that we decline will find love from other festivals. Of course, programmers get a little defensive about these instances (especially when a declined film becomes a hit or award winner elsewhere), but its just a part of the process."

These are just excerpts, you should most definitely click through to read the entire posts, but, then again, you should just add seafar to your daily reads.

Comments

[David H.]

Thanks for sharing this information. It was an interesting post.

I know very little about the programming, but was interested in understanding a little more about the process and why film festivals programming the same documentary films (features and shorts) that have already played at other festivals. I'm sure that these films are exceptional and programmers believe that these films need to be seen by audiences. However, it seems like several festivals heavily curate their line-up with films fresh from Sundance. Are the cold submissions sent in by filmmakers really poor? Should festivals that curate their program inform filmmakers that there are only so many spots open from the larger pool? If these films are making the festival rounds based on their success at some of the top festivals...perhaps these festivals should consider a traveling festival that showcases a selection of films. In short what is the purpose of having an open call if the majority of films are culled or invited to apply form other festivals?

I look at this blog every morning and enjoy reading about what’s going on in the community, but sometimes I get the feeling that the festival world is a bit incestuous. Perhaps I’m misinformed about the whole process, but it would be nice to hear a little more about how programming works. Otherwise it becomes a mysterious process. I know in the past there has been some discord over the Academy’s selection process and how it compiles its documentary shortlist. Sometimes I feel that festivals have their own veil of secrecy.

[David H.]

I just wanted to add that although my post may sound critical, it was not meant to be. These are my observations, and my questions are merely rhetorical in nature. My apologies if my tone came off the wrong way. Thanks again for the post as it does give some insight to the programming process.