By MCN Editor editor@moviecitynews.com

SUNDANCE INSTITUTE PRESENTS SHORTSLAB: L.A.

sundance logo.png
Inaugural All-Day Education Workshop for Short Filmmakers to be held Saturday, July 31
at Downtown Independent Theater
LOS ANGELES, CA — Sundance Institute invites filmmakers to participate in ShortsLab: L.A., a three-part, all-day educational workshop on July 31offering filmmakers first-hand insight and access into the world of story development, production, and exhibition of short films.
For information or to purchase tickets visit: www.sundance.org/shortslab
ShortsLab: LA — Presented by Sundance Institute
Saturday, July 31
9:30 a.m. – 7:30 p.m.
Downtown Independent Theater
251 South Main Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Tickets: $150
Tickets available online only: www.sundance.org/shortslab


· Story Development (9:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.): Acclaimed filmmakers including Sundance Film Festival alumni share their experiences working with short-form during their careers. These tales from the trenches will focus on conceptualization and script development. Participants will be announced shortly.
· Production (1:00 p.m. – 3:00 p.m.): Industry professionals and special guests speak to the many challenges filmmakers face during production, including budgeting, working with unions, music rights, financing, and much more.
· Exhibition (3:00 p.m. – 5:30 p.m.): An eclectic mix of speakers — including festival programmers, agents, managers and distributers — share advice on how to handle a completed film.
· Cocktail Mixer and Screening (5:30 p.m.): ShortsLab: L.A. caps off with an informal gathering followed by a 7:30 p.m. screening of award-winning short films from the 2010 Sundance Film Festival.
· Feedback: If a filmmaker participates in ShortsLab: L.A. and submits a short film to the 2011 Sundance Film Festival, a Festival programmer will call them post-Festival to offer individual feedback on the film.
A list of participating guests will be announced shortly. Very limited space is available.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments are closed.

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