Charlie Productions : How To Lie Your Way To A BAFTA

In the year 2000 we made a short film called "Russell Square". It was a fairy story set on the London Underground and we shot it in miniDV on our newly acquired Cannon XL1 over a couple of weekends in January. It had a speaking cast of three and a crew of four. Not including the cost of the camera or the computer we bought to edit on, the production cost us £1,000. We were very proud of it and entered it into every competition we could find. This included the British Film And Television Awards which we entered through the simple expedient of filling in an entry form and sending off a VHS tape copy along with a £15 entry fee.

In 2000 digital imaging technology was still at a relatively early stage and there were still arguments to be had as to whether a story told on digital tape could accurately be described as "a film" at all. The British Academy are naturally bastions of the status quo and at that time refused to consider any short film that could not be presented as a film print. We were asked to reassure them on the entry form that, if selected, a celluloid copy of our work would be forthcoming. Like all good filmmakers should do in this situation, we lied.

Perhaps this sounds cavalier. Reckless with money even, since what was the point of spending £15 to enter a competition we were not eligible for? I'm not entirely sure, though I do know we never expected to win. We'd shot the film in two weekends. One of the main cast was our mate Keith who ran a music shop in Barnet. This film was never going to win a BAFTA. My best rationale for entering is that being rejected because we'd lied was at least trying. We'd not been to film school, we'd not had a film in a festival for two years, we'd not attempted to film anything of more depth than a comic sketch for that time either. To not be eligible for a BAFTA would have been a great boost to our morale.

This is, I hasten to add, a post-rationale of our actions. At the time we just wrote the cheque, ticked the box saying we had what we didn't and sent it all off.

Now obviously I wouldn't be writing this if the answer had been anything other than positive, so picture us in the Autumn of 2000: We had shot our next short film, "Burnt Bernard" and were working on "Old Man Dies", when we found that "Russell Square" had been "long-listed" for "award nomination" and that we were required to prepare the print we did not have. I rang the number on the end of the letter and spoke to Katie Dolly who was in charge. To prove that we're not just a bunch of con artists and cheats I will underline now that at this point I told Katie nothing but the truth. We had no print. We could get one made, but it would cost £5,000. Five times our original budget. Money we did not have. What should we do?

By 2004 when "Free Speech" was in the running for the same award the landscape of British filmmaking had changed. We had the Film Council, we had the Regional Screen Agencies, we'd had the Relph Report and Digital Filmmaking was the great big nebulously fantastic thing that would change the world. By 2004 even BAFTA had changed their stance and were accepting films on DigiBeta and High Def, provided they had previously been screened in one of a list of prestigious film festivals.

As a result of this change of position I don't think it is any longer possible to get a glimpse of the behind-the-scenes working of the BAFTA Best Short Film Award in the way that we did with "Russell Square". These days there are no private conversations to be entered into. The rules are there for all to see and you're either Nominated or your Not.

In 2000 we were something of a hot potato. We were clearly exactly the sort of people the British Academy wanted to be encouraging but in order to be in with a chance of the prize we'd need to spend £5,000 we clearly didn't have. Feeling our pain, Katie explained what was really going on.

There were three rounds to the BAFTA Best Short Film Award. Around 30 films were "long-listed", these were then divided around the judges on VHS. Each judge would pick a couple from their pile and so create a "short-list" of 10 films. These 10 would then be screened on film prints to all the judges who would, effectively, pick a winner and five runners-up. It was these final 5 that would be BAFTA Nominated and would get all the actual hoo-haa and press screenings. The bottom 5 would simply disappear from history, effectively as far from being Nominated as those that hadn't make the long list.

We were in the top 30 short films made in 2000. Shot in two weekends. Staring our mate who runs a shop. We were delighted and, not wanting us to waste our money, Katie promised us that she would sound out the judges and try and find out what our chances were of being on the final short list.

A couple of weeks past and Katie rang back. We were in. We were one of the 10 best short films made in 2000. We were in trouble. At this stage she could offer us no more help. There was one screening left and it had to be a screening of our £5k print. Either we pulled out or we spent the money and hoped that our film was in the top 5 and so Nominated (which matters) and not in the bottom 5 and forgotten for eternity.

We wrote to the local papers. We asked our school. We thought about asking the Arts Council but this process took at least 8 months so that was out of the question. Luckily the main part in the film is played by our mate Keith Malin and, I don't know if I mentioned this, but he ran a shop in Barnet. This meant that, unlike the rest of us, he had some money. With help from Keith, from Keith's Dad and also from our family, we found £5,000.

We went to Technicolor where they looked at us like we were fools. "You do realise it won't make it look any better?" they said, we nodded, knowing that it wouldn't. They tried harder "What you've got to understand is that, the quality that you've shot in, well, it won't change because it's on film". We nodded. "We'll do our best" they added "But you have to expect that the best it will be is like seeing your film but bigger." We nodded. They repeated this fact, using hand signals. We paid them £5,000 and they struck a 35mm print from a film we'd shot on miniDV in two weekends on the London Underground.

We gave the print straight to Katie Dolly and we crossed our fingers.

She put the film in front of the esteemed judges of the British Academy of Film and Television and they decided, quite rightly, that a film shot in two weekends on miniDV and staring a man who works in a shop in Barnet was not worthy of BAFTA Nomination.

Obviously this was a shame. Perhaps even more irritating was being invited to the screening of the Nominated Films and seeing that among them was James Pilkinton's film "Sweet" which starred the then unknown Mighty Boosh in a better shot, better looking and much ruder version of the same idea behind "Burnt Bernard", which we were still editing. He had, in effect, beaten two of our films in one go.

Better news came later when "Russell Square", a film which previously had been rejected by every festival it had entered, was suddenly strangely popular now it was on 35mm. Better still the men in the lab were wrong. The film print was the same film but somehow it was more beautiful than I'd ever seen it.

That year the BAFTA Best Short Film Award went to "Shadowscan" by Tinge Krishnan. This film cost £92,000. Our initial pride at failing to win a BAFTA with "Russell Square" has never really faded. We were nowhere and suddenly we were being beaten by the best, which is far better than being beaten by anyone else.

We were immensely proud of having been considered at least the 10th best Short Film made in 2000 and though that's not officially what BAFTA ever said that is, effectively, what they meant. There was no reason for us not to shout about this from the roof-tops. No one else did, but most people obviously didn't know that they had got so close because they hadn't been trying to persuade Katie to change the rules for them.

So we did. At every opportunity we let everyone know that we had been "short-listed for BAFTA nomination". Again let me underline that for once we were telling the absolute scientific truth of the matter. We cannot in anyway be held responsible for the fact that the human mind has a natural tendency to shorten and simplify. We never told anyone that we'd been BAFTA Nominated. That's just what everyone seemed to hear or imagine we meant when we said "short-listed for the BAFTA nomination".

I correct it when I hear it, but what can I do if people make up lies about us behind our backs? Ehy?

Charlie Productions believe passionately in doing things and always trying to stop in time for tea.

ShareThis | admin | sitemap | fresh look media