How did this idea of starting a film project begin?

 

Well the idea of a film project isn’t new.  There are lots of them out there of different sorts.  But back when Justin and I were first kicking around the idea of starting a film project here in Hood River we were trying to find a project concept that would solve some issues inherent to having a project in this area.  The main problem was that while we felt that there was a lot of interest in film within this community, there wasn’t a lot of experienced filmmakers here to pull from to actually have a successful film project.  So it of course lead to a discussion of how to facilitate gathering more teams.  We knew that we couldn’t ask newbie filmmakers to join a competition where they were guaranteed to be blown out of the water by veterans of the trade.  And I really didn’t want to deal with a huge marketing push for talent outside of the area.  I knew we didn’t have the resources to launch something like that our first year.  But then it dawned on us that we had to create a different kind of film project where the teams regardless of their backgrounds and experience in filmmaking could come in and have a reasonably good chance at winning.

 

You had to level the playing field.

 

Yes.  We knew that if we could pull that off, then the field of potential teams would open up dramatically.

 

So you then came up with this idea of judging films based solely on content and not quality?

 

I read somewhere that the film industry spits out something like 500 movies a year.  How many of those are we consciously aware of?  How many of those do we actually go see?  And how many of those do we actually like?  The truth is that the majority of films that are made suck.  And why is that?  You could even go a step further and ask out of those 500 movies that are made, how many weren’t made?  These big studios have teams of people sifting through piles of scripts, listening to thousands of pitches, and the movies that are made are representative of what the big boys think are the best of the best.  Isn’t that something?  And then when you start thinking about how many movies made today are remakes of good movies that came before, you stop and think, my god, they’ve ran out of ideas!

 

Okay, so how does that fit?

 

It fits because you realize that we have long since departed from the path of what film was originally about.  It was about telling stories.  Letting people experience life through different lenses.  Nowadays it seems like studios are more concerned about big money and these huge movies with crazy amounts of special effects.  They aren’t great stories so much as they are great spectacle.  But the thing is, if you really strip all of that away and go back to just the concept of telling a good story through the medium of motion picture you realize that a good story doesn’t require big money or fancy equipment.  You start to look around and find some amazing stuff created by people with no budget and no fancy equipment.

 

Go on.

 

So if you take all of this back into our conceptualization of the film project you realize that if you can create a film competition where the teams aren’t being judged on “quality,” things that expensive equipment provides for you, then you really do have a potential even playing field for all teams that enter regardless of their background in film.

 

But there has to be some measure of quality, right?

 

There is.  It’s just that we are taking the pressure of that aspect of filmmaking out of the equation.  

 

I don’t understand.  It just seems like you’d have a collection of poorly made films.

 

The thing is that people who flat don’t have a clue about the very basics of shooting and editing will still not attempt this competition.  But there are a lot of people out there that do have some measure of background in this area.  A lot of people who would like to make something, but are just afraid to do so.   
 

Why are they afraid?

 

There is this “perfectionist paralysis” that is evident in aspiring filmmakers in that the quality of the film to be created has to be perfect or it’s not worth attempting.  Such a feat is an illusion, but never the less keeps people away.  There isn’t a movie out there that doesn’t have some sort of technical issue that makes the piece not perfect.  It’s just that 99.9% of those mistakes goes by without anyone noticing.  But by taking away that element from the competition people are not only more willing to give it a shot, but also focused where the focus should be.  Telling the story.   And people will surprise you.  Even though the “quality” aspect is taken away, people are still intrinsically motivated to turn in the best “quality” film they can.

 

So what about the experienced filmmakers?  The ones that do have access to all the high end gear?  Why would they want to join a competition like this?

 

The world is hungry for good films with good stories.  For those out there that have the “quality” aspect down, and come into this competition forced to focus on the story aspect of filmmaking and find themselves excelling in that as well....Well they are going to have a very lucrative future in filmmaking.

 

So what is this Creative Limitation and how does it play into this film project?

 

I stumbled onto this concept of purposefully placing restraints on your creative process.  There are stories out there of musicians who have created wonderful pieces of music from forcing themselves to limit their chord choices to only 2 or 3.  Or other artists who only using a banana, of all things, as a canvas, created something special.  There is an a guy who did a TED talk by the name of Phil Hansen back in 2013 who later in an article said something to the effect that placing limits on our creative process forces us to take a step back and search for connections available to us that we didn’t see before.  I can’t explain it, but it does seem true that works of amazing art are created out of the greatest struggle.  There is no revelation in discoveries that required no effort.  The real gems in life are those found from hard work.  So we take this concept and apply it to the film project.  We try to create film requirements that give these teams story themes upon which to explore, but also limits to what can happen within these themes in an attempt to force unique story creation.

 

Can you give an example?

 

Say you give a theme concept of a couple madly in love.  What can you do with that?  What kind of story path would you go?  If I were to ask you to give me a good story idea based on that theme, could you?

 

Not really, no.

 

Right.  There isn’t anything there to spark ideas.  But if I were to task you to come up with some ideas based on the idea of a couple madly in love, but then told you they can’t physically touch each other, now we are at least starting to get somewhere.   Why can’t they touch each other?  Do they live far apart?  Is one of them sick?  Is it something like Rogue from X-men where if you touch her she sucks the life out of you?  We now have something to get the mind stirring.  Our brains are wonderful machines that are made to solve problems, but we can’t engage our brains until we start asking “how” questions.  To just simply ask for a good story idea out of a theme of “madly in love,” we aren’t being asked to solve a problem.

 

So that’s Creative Limitation applied to this film project?  You give the teams a theme but then require them to deal with a limitation?

 

It’s conceptually the first step.  So now we’ve created a scenario where at least we are quickly generating ideas.  But we can’t stop there.

 

Why?

 

In those situations the story ideas generated are usually some story concept that unbeknownst to them is just a rehashed idea from something they’ve heard or seen before.  Because when we ask our brains a “how” question, our brain goes to work digging up possible solutions from our lifetime of experiences.  Even story ideas that come to people in “moments of inspiration” are more often than not, crap.  Someone saw a movie 10 years ago, it festered in their subconscious for that time until it regurgitated itself into that “moment of inspiration,” then that film is made, and the process repeats with someone else.  It’s a copy of a copy of a copy.  All cliche.  Because we are rarely consciously aware of the source material our brain’s answers are pulling from.  The truth is that when someone is trying to answer a story problem, they don’t know that the first place their brains go digging into is every movie they’ve ever seen, and every book they’ve ever read.

 

Interesting.  So how do you solve the problem?

 

Well, I think just being consciously aware of this process is a good first step.  And knowing to question your story ideas relentlessly.  Also I think if you are one to try to be a good story creator, then you need to limit your exposure to fictional material.  Read non-fiction books on various subjects.  Travel to new places.  Experience new things.

 

Are you saying we should stop watching movies?

 

No.  I’m trying to say that we need to invest in providing good source material for our brains to pull from.

 

Okay, so how does all of this apply to the film project?  How do you implement Creative Limitation and actually get unique story ideas out of your teams?

 

Well that’s the million dollar question.  We try to create a project where teams leave the launch meeting and have a good platform from which to come up with ideas.  But we also try to go a step further and add other limiting elements in hopes that those limiting elements will help eliminate the easy answers and refine the good ones.

 

What do you mean?

 

So we are basically taking creative limitation and doubling down on the idea.  So we first provide some sort of a limitation to get the ideas turning, but then we limit them a second time to a lesser degree in hopes that teams will be forced to take a step back and vet their story ideas against those limiting elements.

 

What are some of these secondary limiting elements?

 

Well the rules, of course, change every year.  But the first year, for example, the teams were asked to pick two themes from a list and create a story that blended the two themes.  So we start out by asking the question, how do we create a story that satisfies both themes.  That gets the ideas going.  Then we added in the secondary limitations by asking them to incorporate movie quotes into their scripts.

 

And that works?

 

Yes, because the teams are forced to sit there during those first few hours of the project while they are trying to come up with an idea to run with and they look at these movie quotes, these seemingly random lines of dialogue and are forced to ask themselves, how are we going to incorporate these movie quotes seamlessly into our film?  And the teams that pull it off well are the ones that have to sit there and refine their story idea until all the pieces fit.  But it’s hard concept to implement because you want to create an environment where teams are forced to struggle coming up with a story concept that solves the problem of having to deal with these limiting elements, while on the other hand not limiting their choices too much to the point of squashing their freedom to explore.  There’s a fine line there that we as the creators of the project are constantly trying to refine.

 

So how are these films judged?

 

So it’s broken up into two sections.  A “Judges Score Card,” and a “Earnable Points” section.  So every year we have a panel of judges that are asked to score the films based on content only related fields.  Then we also have a section of points the teams can earn by placing those secondary elements such as movie quotes into the film.

 

How has it worked out?

 

It’s been a mixed bag.  It’s a really hard concept to push that the “best made” film isn’t necessarily going to be the one that wins.  We have had some amazing films, both in content and quality lose just because they ignored getting movie quotes into the film.  That can be a tough pill to swallow and a hard concept to explain to people who come see these films.  But I really do think we are on to something here and need to stay the course.

 

How will you know when the project is a success?

I think it already is.  It’s true on the one hand I’d like to see it grow, get more people involved, get more teams to participate.  But for me I knew the project was a success when during our second year the team that won turned in a film shot on a mix of an Iphone and a low end HandyCam.  Their film suffered from audio problems and other technical issues that were a bit jarring, but their story concept was solid and they seamlessly incorporated the other various film elements.  So to be able to award top honors to that kind of a team tells me that it’s working.  And on the flipside of that, last year the top film was made on a RED.  So I know it’s working when teams from opposite ends of the spectrum are able to win the competition.