Festivals as Social Events

Cinema, at its core, is a passive form of entertainment. Much like listening to music or mindlessly clicking through facebook, watching a film is an act that is often solitary and (at least for the average viewer) mindless. A spectator sits down, either at home or at the theater, and spends roughly two hours consuming a piece of entertainment. The film rarely asks much from the viewer, and vice versa. Since the early 1900s, that has been the founding aspect of film. However, film festivals do something completely different: They are a form of active entertainment, a social event constructed around the interactions of a multitude of people and demographics.

In his essay Looking for Sundance: The Social Construction of a Film Festival, Daniel Dayan states, "Any social encounter involves at least two complementary performances, coordinated by social rules. Any gathering involves multiple performances, coordinated by collective rules" (Iordanova 45). In that sense, festivals act a both a gathering and constant stream of encounters. Festivals live off of their audiences, and the more interactions throughout, the more successful it will be.

Let's look at five examples of potential festival-goers: Filmmakers, critics, cinephiles, agents/distributors and passive moviegoers. Festivals are destinations for each of these demographics to come together and interact in a single, quick paced event. The filmmakers attend to showcase their newest works, critics to review anticipated films, cinephiles to enjoy a weekend of breakthrough films they may be unable to see anywhere else, agents/distributors to find new talent and films, and the average moviegoer makes up the rest of the audience. While each has their own original goal, the festival acts as a venue to both accomplish their tasks and create new ones.

At Frozen River Film Festival last year, aside from the multitude of screens laid out across Winona State University, there were several smaller sessions where a filmmaker would host a panel for festival-goers covering a topic relating to documentary filmmaking. This is a straightforward interaction between the filmmaker and the spectators in a way that other film distribution methods would not offer. Post screening Q&A sessions are similar, offering direct communication between the the two groups. It also opens the door for filmmakers to develop new connections, agents to find a new artist to represent, and critics to get direct insight into what makes the film work.

Festivals rely on their social interaction, much the same way as a music festival or gallery opening would. Without a steady influx of spectators and artists alike, the content displayed not only wouldn't be seen, but the screenings themselves would just be glorified theater showings. The interaction between the audiences and the filmmakers are what makes festivals thrive. Each film set, screening, session, or interview constitutes a moment of inter-demographical communication. Different film festivals will have different levels of opportunities, depending on the number of guests and size and scope of the festival itself, but the fact of the matter is festivals will always

In Dayan's analysis of Sundance, he explains how the festival's requirements that every film must be premiering at the festival opens up a multitude of possibilities. While some festivals may have just a few premieres, Sundance has hundreds. The festival constitutes a rare destination-esque event, where people will travel across the globe to be a part of that initial audience for each film. It's both a social event, and a sort of social trophy.

Admittedly, neither Mountainfilm or Frozen River operate on the same level as Sundance. Instead, they each take the form of a different kind of social gathering. For Mountainfilm, the festival offers a scenic location in the Rocky mountains that feels more like a weekend getaway than an ultra-modern high society type festival like you'd see at Cannes or other large name festivals. While I can't speak from experience, I expect to see less industry insiders and more groups of average people and outdoors-y types. More than Sundance, the festival is based off the destination more so than the content. For instance, if the festival was being held in a small town in Nebraska, the audience would be entirely different.

Frozen River is an example of a local social event, where the majority of the audience is from the surrounding Driftless region of southeast Minnesota. It's a smaller scale festival for sure, and not particularly a destination fest like the aforementioned Mountainfilm or Sundance, and its relative lack of premieres likely hurts it in terms of growth, but where it succeeds is as a community based event. College students, baby boomers, professors and local artists all come together for a weekend of documentaries, a few guests, and plenty of events. It might not operate on the same level as many other festivals in the circuit, but that might be part of the point.

The reason why film festivals and the larger festival circuit work is that each festival is inherently different, though they all are based on social interaction. Whether it's the industry itself that turns out in droves or just the surrounding suburbs, each festival blossoms based on the inherent community and their ability to interact around a common subject: film.

[1] Iordanova, Dina. The Film Festival Reader. St Andrews: St Andrews Film Studies, 2014. Print.