Not actively terrible!

The problem with STIFF starts with the “T.” Seattle’s True Independent Film Festival, now in its fifth year, puts the accent mark in its dick-joke-entendre acronym over the “True”— “Somebody needs to help these TRUE Independent gems find an audience on the lookout for the unusual,” reads the STIFF website—and it waves that “True” like a fist at Seattle International Film Festival. It’s a bratty, punk-as-fuck younger brother trying to get the goat of the more-composed older sister. There’s a fine tradition of this sort of institutional fight-picking—Slamdance thrives in the shadow of Sundance, after all—but the STIFF producers have been blinded by their own fuck-the-man glee; the only one they’re hurting, really, is themselves.

Slamdance makes sense as counterprogramming to Sundance; the former festival is always packed with wealthy Hollywood elites and offers limited screening opportunities. It’s possible for someone stranded in the relative isolation of frigid Park City, Utah, to integrate both festivals into their routine. But STIFF is trying to counterprogram the largest film festival in the United States, which itself is trying to counterprogram the first few weeks of beautiful Seattle spring weather.

When I ask Clint Berquist, managing director of STIFF, why he doesn’t move the festival to the fall or winter, when Seattleites are practically clamoring for more diverse indoor entertainment, he acknowledges that they “have discussed the possibility” of a move, but the parallel timing is “a statement” against SIFF’s “homogenization” and lack of coverage of local filmmakers. Berquist has a point about the shameful state of SIFF’s local coverage—not counting the local students who competed in the Adobe Youth Voices short-films showcase, only 28 SIFF films are locally produced this year—but to decry the “homogenization” of a festival that includes 406 entries from 67 countries seems ridiculous. Berquist rails against SIFF’s $11-a-pop ticket prices—STIFF provides $50 all-access passes—and he is especially proud of the fact that 50 of STIFF’s 150 films are locally produced and that all of them are “independent,” a label determined by a panel of 20 screeners. “We turn down stuff that has really recognizable talent,” Berquist says, noting that STIFF routinely rejects films for having too high a budget or too many celebrities.

In the last week, I’ve watched eight STIFF movies. The two locally produced films that Berquist suggested that I watch—A Visitor in the Night and Still Life, both shorts—were entirely awful. The writing, cinematography, and acting were subprofessional and clichéd. And of the six other films I watched, one (Scream of the Bikini, a parody of sexploitation spy films, would have been a hilarious half-hour short but was basically one joke stretched out to a nauseating 99-minute running time) was not actively terrible, and only one movie (Scrap, a documentary about bizarre roadside attractions that succeeds because of its subjects and not its amateurish filmmaking) made for an enjoyable viewing experience. The other four were uncomfortable and unpleasant to watch because they were so poorly written, directed, and acted. In the past, I’ve seen STIFF films that I liked. I’ve also seen many more that I hated (after I write negative reviews of them, I usually get e-mails from the directors chastising me for not understanding what, in the words of one filmmaker, “truely Independent cinema” means), and STIFF’s ratio of good-to-atrocious movie experiences has always been unfavorable.

Here’s a two-step plan for what STIFF needs to do if it wants to stop being a hater and start being a player. First: Give up on the dumb-ass counterprogramming idea and move the whole festival to February. It’s unfair to the very independent filmmakers they’re trying to promote—many of whom are doing their own marketing—to make them compete with Edward Norton or Spike Lee for the fleeting attention of the press. Second: Trim the schedule by about a third to remove some of the real stinkers. This obsession with Truth and Independence is supposed to make STIFF the X Games to SIFF’s Olympics—daring, bold, exciting—but this all-inclusive, every-movie-is-special-and-has-value bullshit makes it more like the Special Olympics, where everyone gets a medal for showing up. If it focused on quality (SQIFF?) and made STIFF a destination instead of branding it as a fuck-you, SIFF might actually take notice. recommended

STIFF

June 4—13
www.trueindependent.org

24 replies on “A STIFF Kick in the Pants”

  1. Hey Paul –
    Thanks for the quick chat last week and for taking the time to write up STIFF. At the risk of being one of those directors who follows up after a negative review, I do have a few minor nits with your article:

    – STIFF is in its 6th year, not its fifth.
    – When you and I talked about the price differences of the two festivals, I never mentioned SIFF’s $11 tickets. I simply mentioned that SIFF’s badges can cost as much as $2750 and that our All Access badges only cost $50.
    – When I mentioned “homogenization”, it was in relation to the overall state of independent film. This is an industry problem. While I do believe that SIFF has a hand in it, I don’t believe it is all their doing.

    I also understand that for many members of the press, the timing of our festival can be a bit painful. Most of you have already killed yourselves reviewing independent films for your SIFF coverage and here we are asking you to dive right back in and do more of the same for STIFF films. When we have discussed changing the time of the festival, making the local press happier has been at the top of the list of reasons for doing so. Now I guess I could add “avoid spending time responding to unhappy local press” to that list.

    Could we become bigger be taken more seriously by moving the timing of STIFF? I guess it is possible, but getting bigger and more serious really isn’t our mission. As far as I am concerned, there is already far too much seriousness in Seattle’s film scene. Your main argument is basically that we should quit doing what we are doing since there is already the largest film festival in the United States going on that already meets everyone’s needs. I remember with great fondness your op-ed titled, “Seattle already has the Weekly, why do we need the Stranger?” and I look forward to reading your article calling for a boycott of local, independent bookstores that foolishly choose to compete with the world’s largest bookstore. But until then, I would suggest that SIFF might not actually be meeting everyone’s needs.

    As far as quality goes, I think that is pretty subjective. Every year we have quite a few people stumble into our screenings thinking that they are going to SIFF (many even give us tickets from their SIFF six packs for admission) and every year we have more and more converts saying things like, “This was better than anything I saw at SIFF”. Your statement about STIFF really sums up my feelings about SIFF. I have seen SIFF films that I really liked, but I have also seen many more that I hated and even though I watch about 500 movies a year, I can honestly say that the only times I have ever fallen asleep in a theater was during SIFF. But as a guy who once went randomly from one SIFF screening after another hoping to stumble across something good, I do understand your pain. It can be tough to reach into a stack of DVD’s and find something that you connect with. But that very act of finding something you connect with is really what it is all about. When you find it, the search is worth it. While limiting Seattle to only one programming voice would certainly make your job easier, I don’t think it would necessarily be a good thing for everyone else involved.

    You might not think that SIFF has taken notice, but every year Carel Spence scours our program and intimidates any filmmakers who happen to be playing both fests into pulling out of STIFF. Doing great at STIFF has also been an excellent launching pad for many filmmakers into SIFF events like the fly filmmaking competition. Last year many of SIFF’s press releases were sure to trumpet the record numbers of local films. While it might be a stretch to think that STIFF’s existence was the sole reason for that renewed interest in local film, if it makes them think twice before they toss a local film into the “rejected” bin, then I think what we are doing is more than worthwhile.

    While I do appreciate your suggestions and feedback, after careful consideration, February just won’t work. All moving to February would do is ensure that we would have fewer submissions and only be able to pull from a pool of films that had already been played or rejected by SIFF the previous year. I don’t have any desire to turn STIFF into a retread of SIFF and I don’t think that giving fewer choices to people really helps anyone out. This is what I was referring to when we briefly discussed the current “homogenization of indie film”.

    Who knows though? You may be right. Every year, a large group of people has to find the motivation to spend several hundred hours putting STIFF together. Maybe we’d be better off letting SIFF have their party, attend a screening of Kung Fu Panda 2 a week before its worldwide release and just donate our time to Habitat for Humanity.

    Clint Berquist
    STIFF

  2. I don’t understand the complaint that SIFF isn’t local enough. The I stands for International, you know. Wouldn’t including a large percentage of local films kind of going against the whole point of the festival?

  3. First of all, I need to say that I have a 100% satisfaction rate with the films I’ve seen at STIFF. Unfortunately, I’ve only felt compelled to see three in the 6 years of it’s existence. A major part of this is SIFF. I’d buy a full pass to STIFF if it was any other time of year, just as I do to SLGFF and SJFF and all the other festivals. I’d probably privilege STIFF over any other competing film festival as well. During SIFF, however, if there’s open space on my schedule (and there’s a fair amount of open space this year, as SIFF is kind of underwhelming this year) it’s time to see friends for a leisurely dinner, or do laundry or anything but go to another film festival.
    I appreciate the statement aspect of programming opposite SIFF, but after six years of making that statement, it’s time for a new statement. I’d also encourage you to take a look at the programs of the Seattle Underground Film Festival, which I think ran for three years in the mid-to-late 90s, curated (I think) by Jon Behrens. There was a lot less of the frat boy humor in SUFF programs then that which seems to swim off the page in the STIFF catalog. Although, if people are turning out for that sort of stuff, I guess you’d be wise to continue. Whatever puts butts in seats. I just think there’d be more butts at another time. Why not program it for the week *before* SIFF? It’s still be sticking it to the man, by wearing people out before SIFF takes off.

  6. If I may chime in with a filmmaker’s perspective… In the current, highly competitive festival environment, STIFF performs a huge service by seeking out movies that do not have big names attached to them, and don’t feature stories that make viewers want to slit their wrists.

    Our crass, comedy feature, Jason’s Big Problem, (screening at STIFF on Tuesday, June 8th, 9:30PM, at the NW Film Forum) may have been deemed low-brow by SIFF’s programmers. But in an era when we’re all trying to cope with an economy struggling to keep its head above the oil-soaked waters, humor and lighter fare may have more value than ever. And I’m not sure the bigger fests have caught on to that yet.

    As for the parallel timing of the two events, one could argue that there will always be conflicts. That was certainly true with our recent successful screenings at the Connecticut Film Festival. On our first night, we were scheduled against a multi-million dollar film featuring most of the cast of Law & Order (not to mention the nationwide opening of Iron Man 2). On our second night, we played at the same time as Barry Levinson’s new movie and the fully catered cocktail party that followed. Even against those odds, we managed to get audiences into our screenings (including several 50+ year olds who we wouldn’t have necessarily thought were in our target audience) and they all had a great time, even engaging us in lively Q&A afterwards.

    No film festival is perfect. But at least STIFF has a clear mission to support the true spirit of independent movie making – and there certainly is an audience out there that loves them for it.

    Hamish McCollester
    http://www.jasonsbigproblem.com

  7. Isn’t the point of SIFF and “international” film festivals, in general, to bring film from elsewhere on the planet to the city they serve? Not to bring local films to the rest of the world? STIFF’s a great idea, but I think they’re kinda missing the point.

  8. @1 I kind was digging what you were saying in your comment, Clint. And then you ended with your glib Kung-Fu Panda dig. I then realized that you were just a pretentious prick. Way to win me over.

  9. @1 I was feeling you, Clint. And then you ended with your glib Kung-Fu Panda dig. I then realized that you were just another pretentious prick.

  10. You know, if STIFF could have scored the new Jesse Bernstein documentary, they’d have had my undying gratitude. It’s shameful that SIFF isn’t showing it. Word is, “it wasn’t submitted.”
    Thanks anyway, STIFF, for showing the Jim Woodring doc.

  11. @8 and 9 Prick? I have been called that before and from time to time it is probably accurate. Pretentious? That’s a new one. I guess I’m moving up in the world.

    @7, I think that is pretty much the point of SIFF – to bring film from elsewhere on the planet to the city they serve and to get people excited about film by giving celebrities an excuse to come to Seattle. The big problem I have is that the casual film fan in this area mostly associates “independent” film with the things that are programmed at SIFF or Sundance when many of these things aren’t really what I would consider independent films. Just because a film comes from another country, doesn’t make it an independent film.

    The Kung Fu Panda comment actually epitomizes our real dilemma. One of the most exciting things about a film festival for much of the public is getting to see sneak previews of major films before their big release, especially if the stars of that film attend the screening and do Q&A’s. Some of my own favorite film memories are actually of these types of events at top tier festivals around the country (and I would love to see Jack Black at a Q&A as I am a huge fan). In the past, we have discussed flirting with that model ourselves to get more people excited about the festival and have made a conscious effort not to go down that path at this point. Does it keep us from getting bigger or being taken more serious by the industry? It probably does, but it just feels much better for us to try to champion the little guy then to become another stop on a press junket. If we ever wanted to be able to turn STIFF into a paying job for the organizers, moving it to a different time and organizing those types of preview events would probably be a good place to start though.

  14. Paul,

    I welcome you to come to the Central Cinema tonight at 9:30 (Friday, 4 June) to see my short film ACES OVER EIGHTS, or watch it on my website http://www.twosherpas.com.

    I don’t know if it’s SIFF worthy, but it’s STIFF worthy and I thank the festival programmers for the chance to show my film in my old home town.

    Go STIFF!

    Chris Morgan
    ACES OVER EIGHTS, director
    twosherpas.com

  15. Paul,

    I welcome you to come to the Central Cinema tonight at 9:30 (Friday, 4 June) to see my short film ACES OVER EIGHTS, or watch it on my website http://www.twosherpas.com.

    I don’t know if it’s SIFF worthy, but it’s STIFF worthy and I thank the festival programmers for the chance to show my film in my old home town.

    Go STIFF!

    Chris Morgan
    ACES OVER EIGHTS, director
    twosherpas.com

  17. I was a film maker that was invited STIFF a few years ago and was a little bit disappointed. I guess the main problem was my quick ‘semi-highbrowed’ animated short was paired with a feature length documentary about thrash metal, and another short before it. I remember after the first short and my short finished a group of the audience members just walked out and one of my biggest regrets was not walking out with them and asking them what they thought about my film.

    I love watching people watch my movies and would have liked to have had the opportunity to interact with the audience. I attended a block of short films and it was fun and a few directors were present and got to talk about their films, I was disappointed my film wasn’t grouped with other shorts.

    The STIFFies were also kind of pointless as every film got one, I received one for ‘best claymation’ I kind of have this pet peeve about the term claymation, not only does it separate animation that uses clay from non-stop-motion animation but basically you end up only competing against kids who don’t even know the difference between oil based clays and Play-Doh, you can’t even compair it against foam-latex (or refrigerated meat) animations. It’s bad enough that animation doesn’t even get to compeat against live action thanks to the fuckers at the Academy that didn’t want Beauty & the Beast to win best film so they invented the stupid ‘Best Animated Feature’ category. So now not even CGI, Flash, Tradition, and Stop-motion are competing for the same awards making anything they win almost meaningless as there isn’t enough animation at festivals to begin with. Showing up practically guarantees some kind of win. If only two or three (or even 5 or 6) STIFFies given out it might be something a film maker could be proud of. I would rather have no awards then tons of awards.

    I would like to say I’m not as bitter as this post makes me sound, STIFF got my film listed on IMDB, and the short block I was able to attend was fun and Clint and everyone at STIFF was very nice to me and my writer, it’s just that there was a lot that could have been improved.

    Chris A. Boyer

  18. PS: I’ve been attending SIFF (not as a film maker) and have been having a lot of fun and I’m pretty sure that Robogeisha is a lot lower brow then many of the films playing at STIFF

  21. Paul, mijo, you gotta go out and make a movie. And then screen it in front of a bunch of other wannabe filmmakers who are al hopped up on Redvines.

    Then re-read your article, and see if you still agree with yourself.

  22. We would definitely check out STIFF if it were at a different time of year.

    Unfortunately STIFF feels to me like the Green Party – a bunch of idealists (who I love) who think they need to tear down others who are a little more mainsteam in order to seem cooler or better. What it unfortunately does is limit your audience so that the choir is all assembled and one person is preaching away to them all while the chairs remain empty.

    I think this piece was spot-on and if the STIFF organizers were to lay down their insults and take heed some of the advice, Seattle’s film community could only win.

  23. With sold out shows, I dont see how STIFF is limiting the audience.

    These movies will not play at SIFF. Its not a competition its an alternative and if it wasnt working people wouldnt go. It looks like Clint has found his customer and is giving them what they want. From Horror to dick jokes to very artistic movies. Clint is giving a reflection of what is being made in Seattle and mixing it with films from LA, Toronto and everwhere else. Plus the parties are a lot of fun. I have made some good friends and have had a great time.

Comments are closed.