Documentary Shorts

Short format is an appealing approach to non-fiction film, allowing the filmmaker to address smaller topics than would be required to sustain a feature-length documentary. Sadly, this format severely limits the potential of reaching wide or diverse audiences. Short films won't typical show in mainstream theaters, or even most alternative ones, nor on most TV channels. Film festivals, galleries, and art centers are probably still the premiere venues for short film, though the internet, and maybe premium channels, hold promise. Yet even these new distribution methods can only reach certain, limited audiences (for instance, those with internet and time to waste). Furthermore, to become popular online, a video must generally go "viral," a phenomenon that seems to have little correlation to production value or artistic merit.

Successful short films in the festival circuit, as evidenced by these three films, can employ a wide variety of production methods. The most fundamental element of success seems to be selection of material appropriate to the film's short length and niche audience. Festival audiences are likely enthusiastic and willing to engage their minds, as compared to computer-tied college students seeking hedonistic escapist entertainment (e.g. stupid people hurting themselves in viral videos). A successful short documentary seems to take a single, familiar topic, present an interesting perspective on it, and then connect it to a bigger concept. For example, graffiti is familiar, its removal is interesting, and the film connects it (compellingly but perhaps a little thinly) to the larger notion of subconscious art (in fact, it's all right there in the film's title). Another example: asparagus is familiar, its enthusiasts are interesting, and the film connects them to globalization, the anti-drug agenda, and the U.S. political process, which together imperil the Oceana County way of life. These films' short length also means timing is key. They don't have time to draw the audience in slowly; they must have a hook. The Subconscious Art of Graffiti Removal grabs us with a intense score, immediate dramatic intellectualization of graffiti removal, and compelling colorful images. ASPARAGUS displays its zany asparagus people to great effect. Such films must then maintain a deliberate, if not fast, pace. Lose the audience, and there is little opportunity to regain them. Build your film quickly or risk seeming of no consequence. ASPARAGUS is unrelenting, so much so that lines of dialog practically run into each other, yet despite this frenzied pace, it is short and simple enough that the audience has no difficulty processing it in its aftermath. "Viral videos" represent an extreme case of this principle, where there is virtually no development, simply premise and immediate payoff.

As compelling as short films can be, a paradigm shift is necessary for them to have impact comparable to feature-length documentaries (this is ironic, given the time constraints of most participants in modern society). Festival- and gallery-goers will likely remain niche audiences, though perhaps valuable proving grounds. The corporate stranglehold on TV leaves little hope there (though it seems to be embracing the "viral" revolution). Alternative-format theaters would be an exciting development, but would require quite a grassroots movement to penetrate beyond large-city markets. On this side of the digital divide, the internet appears to be the last best hope, but it must eventually cater to more sophisticated, less tech-savy audiences. Ultimately, short documentaries run into the same battles faced generally by filmmakers working outside mainstream conventions (e.g. subject matter, production methods).