Definition of short film

[frankiepop]

i dunno, but i was on the verge of asking a similar question and you may be as good as anybody for this information. do you or anybody else have some recommendations for short film collections, either by a single short film maker or several film makers. maybe some that are a little common that i could cop on ebay on the cheap.

[frankiepop]

and i dont know why i am on the top

[burning dog]

Originally Posted by AntManBee

A web search brings up several subjective answers to the question, which probably is telling enough, but is there any standard definition of "short film" in terms of maximum length?

Commercially a short film was any film shorter than 33 minutes.In the days before multiplexes and single features,sometimes they were shown as as a third film (ie as well as a B movie). In the early days programmes consisted of one feature and a number of shorts.

Some were commercially sponsored documentaries. These documentaries could last up the full 33 mins (or seemed to ). There were also comedies by Laurel and and Hardy etc that would be considered commercial "shorts".

In the "Art" movie world I think it refers to much shorter films, around 10 minutes usually.

[AntManBee]

A web search brings up several subjective answers to the question, which probably is telling enough, but is there any standard definition of "short film" in terms of maximum length?

[Gary Sisco]

This long.

[AntManBee]

Originally Posted by frankiepop

and i dont know why i am on the top

Yeah, what happened????? My original post appears as #4 in this thread.

Thanks burning dog for the info. I didn't know any of that.

[Sergio Zamora]

I thought a short was basically a one-reeler.

Back in the 40s, there were 45+- minute films that Hal Roach called streamliners. The idea was that you'd make two films and that would be the equivalent of a feature. I've also seen old b-movies that last around that long. That seems like a good idea given that there are so many movies made that really don't have 90 minutes of material.

[burning dog]

Originally Posted by Sergio Zamora

I thought a short was basically a one-reeler.

Back in the 40s, there were 45+- minute films that Hal Roach called streamliners. The idea was that you'd make two films and that would be the equivalent of a feature. I've also seen old b-movies that last around that long. That seems like a good idea given that there are so many movies made that really don't have 90 minutes of material.

Yes! I think basically it's a one reeler, for some reason in the old closeley controlled UK film distribution system, these were up to 33 minutes. The longer ones would have been called support features (B movies in the US).

It's so true that many films would be better at an hour!

Most of the films in Art House "short" movie competitions are around ten minutes, like a visual equivalent of a "short story".

[LeMo]

Originally Posted by AntManBee

A web search brings up several subjective answers to the question, which probably is telling enough, but is there any standard definition of "short film" in terms of maximum length?

Professionally the cinéma know only to sort of films: short or long.
Every films who are under on hour (60' included) is a short film, over (61' plus) is a long film.

If you look at the DVD from your son or daughter you'll see that most animated films like "Winnie The bears", are 61 minutes long to be considered a "long film".

This are the professionnal film producer/ distributor rules all over the world.

But there's the TV rules. I know only about european rules.
In others parts of the world it could be different. Don't now.

For the tv, there's three categories of films:

short film: 26 minutes and under.

"Middle length" (don't know what term to use in english, in french it's called: "Moyen métrage"): 52 minutes maximum lenght.

Long film, over one hour.

Between 52 and 61 minutes nothing exist in the tv system.

I try to do a film on pianist Noah Rosen. As I'm producing it (easy, it's a "no budget film"), we have decided to do two versions: one of 52 minutes long for the tv and one of one hour and twenty something in the hope that the film will be show in film and jazz festivals.

[AntManBee]

Originally Posted by Sergio Zamora

I thought a short was basically a one-reeler.

This one-reeler and 33 minutes thing confuses me a bit.

Did the standard length for one reel change frome time to time? For instance, if you look up "The Cameraman" with Buster Keaton at All Movie Guide, they give no length for it other than 8 reels, and iirc, "The Cameraman" clocks in at somewhere around 70 minutes.

Am I just confusing things here?

[AntManBee]

Originally Posted by LeMo

Professionally the cinéma know only to sort of films: short or long.
Every films who are under on hour (60' included) is a short film, over (61' plus) is a long film.

60 minutes are where I purely intuitively draw the dividing line between short and long films.

[Sergio Zamora]

Originally Posted by AntManBee

This one-reeler and 33 minutes thing confuses me a bit.

Did the standard length for one reel change frome time to time? For instance, if you look up "The Cameraman" with Buster Keaton at All Movie Guide, they give no length for it other than 8 reels, and iirc, "The Cameraman" clocks in at somewhere around 70 minutes.

Am I just confusing things here?

I think we're talking about different things. Standard reels changed from 10 minutes to 20 minutes at some point, but they haven't changed since then, afaik. I have no idea why shorts would be 33 minutes long in England.

The streamliner comments were just an off-topic aside.

In any case, it was just my guess that a short was a one-reeler, but burning dog's and LeMo's explanations sound pretty good to me.

[burning dog]

Originally Posted by AntManBee

This one-reeler and 33 minutes thing confuses me a bit.

Did the standard length for one reel change frome time to time? For instance, if you look up "The Cameraman" with Buster Keaton at All Movie Guide, they give no length for it other than 8 reels, and iirc, "The Cameraman" clocks in at somewhere around 70 minutes.

Am I just confusing things here?

I suspect in the early days reels were shorter. The 33 minute definition was set in the thirties and applied in the UK, probably a bureaucratic idiocy. It rules out full two reelers but allows for a change to 30 minutes single reels? Who knows?

Halliwell defines a British short as being under 33 minutes so I'm not imagining it.

A film programme consisted of a feature film and more than one short, later these were often replaced by a second feature ( which could still be shorter than a normal feature).

Eventually two features of similar length became the norm, although there was sometimes a "short " 3rd film, often one of the boring documentaries. I'm old enough to remember these double headers plus a short.

The modern definition of a short being under an hour at least simplifies things!

[frankiepop]

so nobody has any short film collections recommendations to be added on to this thread....????????????????????

[burning dog]

Originally Posted by frankiepop

so nobody has any short film collections recommendations to be added on to this thread....????????????????????

Collections of "shorts" seem to be thin on the ground, if you are looking for "art" movies try Film festival websites .

[frankiepop]

mmk

[lazarus]

Originally Posted by frankiepop

so nobody has any short film collections recommendations to be added on to this thread....????????????????????

I recommend this dvd with a collection of short films by Maya Deren:

[frankiepop]

ahhh something specific, thank you...any more...out there?

[AntManBee]

Originally Posted by lazarus

I recommend this dvd with a collection of short films by Maya Deren

What region is that?

[Sergio Zamora]

frankiepop, if your cable provider carries IFC, you might want to consider getting it if you haven't already. They have long sets of short films of all kinds playing all the time. I believe that's where I saw Carl Franklin's excellent "Punk" as well as the claymation based on Burrough's "A Junky's Christmas".

[Squaredancecalling Steve]

Not sure if you're animaphobic or not, but Betty Boop and friends were incredible, and available.


My son and I used to catch all the Spike and Mike festivals, great stuff!

[RainyDay]

If you have cable or satellite access to the Independent Film Channel (IFC) or the Sundance Channel, you will find short films there. Both channels, especially IFC, program blocks of time devoted to film shorts. They are also good channels to find documentaries.

IFC has a wonderful show called Dinner for Five that is hosted by Jon Favreau. He invites four or five other folks who have experience with indy filmmaking and they have very frank, and often very humorous discussions about making movies. It's a mix of Hollywood icons, comedians, directors, actors and the occasional rock star.


http://www.ifctv.com/ifctvflash/medi...main/index.htm

http://www.sundancechannel.com/index.php

[frankiepop]

Originally Posted by Sergio Zamora

frankiepop, if your cable provider carries IFC, you might want to consider getting it if you haven't already. They have long sets of short films of all kinds playing all the time. I believe that's where I saw Carl Franklin's excellent "Punk" as well as the claymation based on Burrough's "A Junky's Christmas".

i dont get them...so i expect you to record some for me...when youre down them just send me a message requesting my address..

[lazarus]

Originally Posted by AntManBee

What region is that?

Region 1

[frankiepop]

what does this region stuff...have to do with...mean.......???

[burning dog]

Region 1 play on N.American players, Region 2 on European.