Good Pitch at Hot Docs
enrico
Pitching a film can be intense, but at Hot Docs it is was particularly… well.. let’s just say that I didn’t expect the Spanish Inquisition. Imagine yourself, the filmmaker-heretic, encircled by 15 to 20 broadcaster-monarchs who are themselves surrounded by 400 believers, all encased in a wood-paneled room, nay, a Theater of Judgment with vaulted ceilings and maybe even a few gargoyles. Can you hear the somber chanting? See a fearsome God peering down? No kidding. I took this photo from my seat:
Given such a courage-withering scenario, which is not really so far from the truth, it’s pretty clear why Jess Search and Katie Bradford, the good folks at BritDocs, have created Good Pitch. Don’t get me wrong, I really like a solid pitch in the old style. The intensity can be riveting and the preparation often produces a great concept. But there are good reasons to consider an alternative pitch. The changing landscape for documentary distribution, particularly for films about contemporary issues, is one such reason and perhaps the most pressing.
Good Pitch selected five projects for consideration and brought together probably a dozen or more human rights organizations to hear the pitch and consider how the film might be incorporated into human rights campaigns or other work. So far so good. Things started to get a little foggy, however, as Good Pitch played itself out. All the organizations had good things to say. The filmmakers pitched well. And, yet, the energy in the room seemed to slip away. I’m not entirely sure what did it, but something didn’t click. In transforming a regular pitch into a Good Pitch, something had been lost.
Perhaps more needs to be at stake during Good Pitch, so that there is a reason to pitch and a reason to reply. How to do this is an open question that may require some radical responses, perhaps even flipping conventional wisdom. What if we included the subjects of the films, or clients of the organizations, in the pitch session? What if we asked organizations to pitch their own communication strategies (read “distribution”) to a panel of filmmakers? What if we asked organizations to comment on the usefulness of the content of the film? What if we monetized everything that an organization could do for a film and gave it out as a package or a prize? (e.g. $50,000 Human Rights Prize = exclusive email announcement about the film to two million people, home page presence, three months advertising for the film, place at the table for human rights conferences, etc.)
I’m not sure what it could be, but in my opinion refining Good Pitch can only be good for the field. Do you think Good Pitch works? Or does it need more Spanish Inquisition?
No Comments
|
| Posted on May 13, 2009
Comments