MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Official Rejection

I saw a smart little documentary last night called Official Rejection, a doc about the experience of one group of filmmakers who got rejected from Sundance, Slamdance, and a parade of other festivals before they start making the journey into the third tier of U.S. festivals, which brought its own ups and downs.
rejection.jpg
The filmmakers, writer/director Paul Osborne and film’s subject/director of the rejected film that Osborne wrote, Ten ’til Noon, Scott Storm, go through this journey with humor and a willingness to expose their limitations, especially in personal relationships. They did a good job of getting a strong line-up of interviewees – Kevin Smith, Tracey Lords, Chris Gore, and Lloyd Kaufman among them – and did a nice with those interviews.
The weakness of the film is that it is too long, it loses its narrative flow a bit in the third act, and for me, there were not enough independent voices about the fest circuit (guys who would actually do interviews, like Jeff Dowd, Mickey Cottrell, Mark Lipsky, Ted Hope, etc.).
I also wondered about the timing of this “first screening.” It’s months after Sundance/Slamdance, so while I am sure they wouldn’t bother even trying for Sundance with this film that’s tough on that fest, you would have thought it would have been a lock for Slamdance. It was not. On the website (and not in the film, which should have it in there), they acknowledge that this film, following in the 2-time rejection of Ten ’til Noon by Slamdance, was also rejected by this year’s fest..
Really, I don’t get that.
One of the really interesting sectons is the self-shredding by Chicago IndieFest, an apparent disaster zone also reported on by the Chicago Reader back then.
Anyway, watch for the film on the fest circuit. Like many docs these days, there is a lack of high-level filmmaking skill on display. But it does the job of telling the story. And if you have spent any time on the fest circuit, you will recognize and identify with much of the movie. And if not, you will get some insight into what everything but the biggest 10 (or so) fests in the United States are like.

Be Sociable, Share!

2 Responses to “Official Rejection”

  1. jeffmcm says:

    While I’m sure the story they tell is interesting, I see two issues –
    (a) that the primary audience for this movie, i.e. other aspiring filmmakers, is going to be pretty small, and
    (b) it used to be in, say, the ’90s that there was a wave of indie films about people struggling in the world of indie films, like Living in Oblivion, In the Soup, Search and Destroy – and now this makes it seem like we’re going a step deeper down into the belly-button?

  2. Hallick says:

    The topic makes the film a little more unique than being just another movie about making movies, but the trailer you can see on YouTube right now is kind of horrible. It feels more like a news report than an actual film; and also seems to say everything you need to know about the story (getting into a festival can be hard, thankless, and no guarantee of anything), so why see the whole thing?
    Besides, anybody paying attention to the press coverage of any given Sundance festival could already tell you the nosebleed-high percentage of films that don’t get noticed, sold, or heard from again.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon