The World of Short Film Programming: Interview with TIFF Programmer Jason Anderson
by Matthew Broughton
Jason Anderson is the director of programming for the Kingston Canadian Film Festival and Aspen Shortsfest as well as the lead programmer for the Short Cuts section at TIFF. He contributes regularly to a huge variety of publications (Readers Digest Canada, The Walrus and Sight & Sound), often about the arts. On top of all that, he also teaches film criticism at the University of Toronto and feature journalism at Ryerson University.
Jason gives me a few lessons on film programming, narrowing down a film line-up from thousands of submissions, and on what makes a short film captivating. Throughout the interview, you’ll learn about the selection process at film festivals of all sizes, as well as advice for filmmakers in creating a festival strategy for their short film.
Matthew: What would you like to see more of/less of in short films?
Jason: I see such a huge variety of work and artistic expression from all over the world with different size film infrastructures. A great thing about shorts is that if you have the idea and the wherewithal, you can make one without too much money or sometimes no money. I would like to see more films from people who maybe haven’t considered doing short films before.
I’d like to see less of the same kind of films, done in the same ways. Which is inevitable when people are still learning the vocabulary of filmmaking or are going to certain schools. There are certain elements that filmmakers use a lot that they think they need and think it’s the only way it can be done. For example, too much music, too many establishing shots, and long credits.
They should focus more on what the film/story really needs, and don’t worry about conventions that they think a short film is supposed to have. Whatever people can do to make their work more personal is great to see, and it is what ultimately wins out. There’s a lot of freedom in the form.
What’s your process in narrowing down a line-up of films for your programs?
The challenge in the short’s realm is the volume of films, especially for a major festival. For TIFF, we get between 4000 to 4500 films every year. Sundance gets 10,000 to 11,000 every year. Fairly assessing and just watching all this stuff is tough. TIFF has screeners working all the time to watch the films. I can't see everything, but I do watch most of it, so it is a huge commitment of time and energy.
There’s always a problem of abundance, where there’s a ton of great equivalent films and figuring out what to prioritize. The programmer has to decide the variety of what is going to work for the audience and what they expect/want, but also find ways that they can be pushed out of their comfort zone at times.
You want to make sure that the variety of work that you’re presenting is from all sizes of film infrastructure and community representation from around the world. It’s got to be the strongest work that’s going to connect with the most people.
Every festival has its own prerogative and parameters. At TIFF, I don't do experimental films, because there’s an experimental program that focuses on that (Wavelengths). Aspen Shortsfest, has a bit of an older and more conservative audience, so it's not necessarily as bold, but there is still stuff I want to play for them.
How do you juggle programming for multiple festivals, teaching and column writing?
Knowing how to keep many jobs on the go is important for anybody in the arts, because that's just the nature of it. I only work at TIFF part of the year, and I have to figure out ways of complimenting it. It’s been great, because I like doing different kinds of work from reading scripts, programming, working on my own projects, journalism to film criticism. They all tend to feed each other too, especially programming.
It's common for programmers to work at multiple festivals.
Besides their lengths, are there any differences of process/challenges in creating a program of feature films vs short films?
With feature films, it’s kind of the same, in the sense of knowing what’s going to work for that audience and to create real diverse body of work and variety. It may be a little easier in that you can give people more of an idea of what they’re getting into and that they’re going to get that one thing, whereas with a shorts program, it’s a basket of apples and oranges that you somehow make some sort of sense of them together.
It depends on the festival too. At the Kingston Canadian Film Festival, we’re not dealing with new feature films so much, it’s more films that are already in circulation we’re just sharing it with the audience in Kingston. At TIFF however, there’s a lot more commercial consideration and people who are looking for their films to be bought by distributors. The slots become more precious and the competition that it entails.
The stakes are lower for shorts, where they are usually from newer filmmakers, and there’s no commercial pressure. It becomes more about sharing visions and doing what you can to enable new filmmakers to get their feet in whatever doors they like.
At TIFF, do you work with the other programmers, or do you have your own team?
It’s kind of my own corner, but I do rely on the programmers, and we share films all the time since it’s an almost impossible challenge to be assessing such a huge diversity of work from all kinds of cultural lenses and perspectives. I need as much help as I can get in discovering all these layers. I didn’t have a programming partner last year, but it’s nice to have a couple of brains on it. I do still have the screeners and a programming associate that I go to a lot.
Shorts programming is especially a collaborative collective effort. I try to be acutely aware of my own limitations, that’s why I look to other programmers and team members to be giving me takes on things they see. For a film to make it into the festival, it gets seen many times by many people. It is ultimately a subjective experience, so having a film seen and experienced by a bunch of people will help you gauge what the response will be like in front of an audience.
What are some of the differences working with a large film festival vs a smaller film festival?
It’s certainly the resources. I am happy that I started at the Kingston Canadian Film Festival, even though it's smaller, I really valued and prioritized the filmmaker and audience experience. It was a great to figure out the best possible conditions to present films and to give the filmmakers a positive experience with an audience. As well as bringing filmmakers together to build their peer network and getting them in contact with industry people.
When I started at TIFF, I saw it as the same way that is hugely valuable to filmmakers, but with a large festival, you can give and connect even more. I want to serve audiences, but I do ultimately want to serve filmmakers and I’m craving when we can come back together again at these festivals. Doing what I can to support and enable filmmakers, whose work I’m excited about, is the best part about working in the shorts sphere.
What are some of the pros/cons for a filmmaker having their short film at a short film festival vs a festival with feature films more at the forefront?
One con for filmmakers wanting to get into a major international festival is that they often pick very few short films, especially compared to how many short films are submitted. At TIFF, not including the Wavelength shorts, I play around 35 to 38 shorts out of the 4000+ that get submitted. That’s about the same number at Cannes, Berlin and Locarno Film Festival, which are hard to get into. The short film sections of these festivals are not as important as the major features there. Although, TIFF and Sundance do integrate their shorts with the rest of the festival more than some other major festivals where they don’t get any attention at all and sometimes the filmmaker doesn’t get the experience they were expecting.
I think about this a lot, because there’s so much great stuff I have to pass on or don't end up playing for a different reason. It’s not always about the film's merits, it's a combination of factors that go in it. That’s why I strongly encourage filmmakers to look at short film festivals. They are amazing and have a lot more room generally. They often know what filmmakers may need in terms of getting to an audience and connecting with other filmmakers.
Clermont-Ferrand International Short Film Festival, Palm Springs International ShortFest and REGARD – Saguenay International Short Film Festival are great examples of festivals that make short films the main menu item.
I would recommend finding short films that you like and have been successful in the festival circuit. See where they played, what awards they got and what lives those films had. Sometimes the Oscar nominated shorts didn’t even win or get played at these big festivals. It also depends on what you consider a successful short film is. Sometimes a successful short could mean playing at 100 festivals or maybe it only played at 2 but it got them representation, or they met a producer at a festival who helped them get their next project off the ground.
I want what’s best for the film, but I can only play so much, and it does hurt my heart. I do try to help films that I didn’t play, and I get them in touch with people at another festival that the film would be great for.
Don’t limit yourself and be open-minded to what a successful short film can be, and the life it can have.
How has filmmaking and film festivals changed in the years since you’ve started? And where do you see it going?
It’s very much a work in progress how things will continue to shift with the pandemic and whenever the post-pandemic phase begins. More accessibility to films and festivals for people, but also being very conscious of the tech barriers that some people face. I appreciate a lot of the things that have come out to connect people virtually, but hopefully the magic of being in person will come back along with it.
For short films, there’s certainly a lot more opportunities and initiatives for young filmmakers from underrepresented communities to get commissions. The New Yorker, the New York Times or Netflix are buying more shorts now. Hulu and FXX are commissioning a bunch more too. A lot more people are interested in looking to shorts as a way to discover and develop new talent.
A generation ago, if you made a feature film that got into Slamdance, you would get a bunch of heat off that, but now, short films are something that industry people want to get in on earlier to make those relationships before that first feature. Feature/filmmaker debuts are more coveted now, even though they’ve likely made a bunch of short films that have done well before.
Any tips on anyone wanting to get into Film Programming and Film Criticism? Would pursuing both be beneficial?
I think both are a similar set of muscles or facilities, where you’re able to think critically about film and talk about what they are and who they’re for. Having a clear taste and being aware of your own biases, and limitations is also good to have. That’s why I appreciated my time as a film reviewer/critic, because I realized what the templates are for so many kinds of films. You find the entry points for audiences and what makes a film resonate with them. Anything to develop that critical faculty is great, without being too schematic or dogmatic, because things are always changing, and your assumptions will be challenged.
One of my fundamentals, when evaluating a film, is if it feels there’s an expression of something personal, or if there is a nugget of a deep meaning to connect with somebody. The other fundamental, is the performances, whether it's documentary or narrative, everyone on screen, especially the person who gets the most screen time, has to be interesting in a charismatic, complex, or energetic way, all the time.
It’s a big challenge for people starting out to get that from people on camera. Sometimes you'll luck out and they’ll have it, but other times it's hard to get. It’s tough to look past a so-so performance. It’s important to get that performance or moment on camera, because if you don't have it, it’s not going to be compelling enough to reach people.
Any tips for emerging filmmakers wanting to submit their short films to any of the festivals you’re programming at?
I think reaching out and introducing yourself is always good, I try to be accessible. A lot of other people at festivals, especially in the short’s world, are really nice. They aren’t in it for the power and glory, they do it because they love films and want to help people make/show their work.
It's not really about connections. At least for me, and for a lot of programmers I know, it always comes back to the work and whether it serves the audience and the program. It can be tough when you're not taking work by filmmakers you love or have become friendly with, but sometimes it just doesn’t fit and hopefully they won’t be too mad.
Be aware of the timing of when you want your film to premiere and the needs of the festival. Short films that play at TIFF might be having their international or North American premiere, but generally they are new, because that’s what the audience expectations are. If it’s played at a big festival like SXSW or has been in the festival circuit for a few months already, it likely won’t get picked. Aspen Shortsfest, on the other hand, is more open.
Have a festival strategy, know your premiere status, and know what you want to get out of that festival, but also be flexible if the plan doesn’t work out. Trust that your work will find its way in the world even if it's not at one of the huge festivals that you are banking on.
If you have more questions for Jason, you can contact him by email: janderson@tiff.net
Submissions are now open for TIFF: www.filmfreeway.com/TIFF
written by Matthew Broughton
Matthew Broughton is a Canadian Director, Writer, Film Journalist, and Film Festival Programmer. His passion and dedication to film turned into writing articles about the craft of filmmaking and film history. He is always on the lookout for new cinematic voices to discover and promote across communities. He’s a certified film fanatic, driven to share stories that impact audiences around the world.
More at www.matthewbroughton.ca
