When asked the question, What would you say is the biggest difference between short films and full-length films? (e.g. because of the time constraints a short film can afford to make less sense and look cool whereas a feature film should have a very obvious message and story)
our surveyors said made the following comments.
Little time for a complicated narrative
Short narrative has more impact
Concise, gets the point across
There is less time for a narrative
short has more impact narrative
Narrative is more direct Cheaper to make
timing, a short film has to be brief and to the point, simple
a short film is concentrated into a short space so more happens without long lulls in the drama.
Short films tend to have a more cult following because they are more difficult to access and are seen through word of mouth. Now more a thing for young people who access through new forms of social media which have a younger following.
No funding for short films
If anything I think short films are the type with the most obvious message - you have a short period of time to make an impact, true, but then the audience leaves with that message fresh in their mind. It is certainly difficult to connect the audience emotionally, but with skill it should still be easier to pack a punch. Short and snappy
Short films tend to be more indie and stylised. Feature length have lots of advertising etc. Short films are less social there is no cinema that shows only short films, wouldn't invite a friend over to watch a short film.
Well there's a difference in length
short films provide a lasting impact and a clearer overall impression of a situation, whereas long films provide a narrative whereby the viewer becomes emotionally attached to, and farmiliar with the main protagonists.
a short film shows an idea, a long film a plot
Short films can present a powerful idea despite their short length. Long films require a storyline or developement of ideas otherwise they are sometimes boring. With a short film, it is important to get a point across without being confusing, so very well chosen (often cool looking) shots are needed.
It's hard to create a background for the story and tell you about characters before you begin the story as there's a time constraint so they would need to be fairly straightforward
understanding characters, sending messages and morals, grabbing the audiences attention (its so easy to click off a short film if its boring you.)
full length films are often stretched out and not as interesting to watch but short films are generally more interesting and less commercial
Less character development and people generally have less access to short films
In a short film, you have much less time to get the point of your short film across to the audience so you're quite limited as to what material you can put into it (most short films i have seen have been to send a message/spread awareness to the audience about a current problem/ongoing issue in society)
the artistic freedom that comes with a short film; long films tend to be more stuck to a specific style due to their genre
It's hard to have a good a story crammed into a short film, whereas full-length films have longer to explore ideas and plots
There is less time for the story to develop so yeah, obviously there are limits and the film cant rely on the acting/emotions of the actors because the audience doesnt have time to connect with them in an empathetic way, so the audience care less about the film, are less affected.
From the ones I've seen they try to do less given time constraints and focus on one issue / style throughout whereas feature films can experiment more with styles / issues
time means they can make less sense
short films have the ability to be charismatic and sometimes make more of an impact because they're quite intense, whereas full-length can tire you out and be more strenuous
i think a short should change your mood, either by making you laugh or making you think about what it was trying to say - a feature length film is more of an 'experience' but a short can be more powerful if done well. It should convey the personality of the director/DOP more directly and give them an opportunity to try new ideas and worry less about what a wider audience will appreciate
Short films can not really have a point unlike feature films. They can just be kookie and interesting
Short films are more arty and more powerful
Lack of developped plot with twists & turns
short films can be more random and interesting, and can be made about anything at all.
the short films are more strange but tend to have a subliminal message
Short films don't include famous actors unlike most feature films.
Less advertising and attention- but still needs to look good and make sense!
A long film gives you more time to become involved with the characters and storyline so you appreciate and enjoy the film more, whereas a short film does not give you enough time to get into the mood of the movie.
it's hard to progress a short film as in build up the characters and relationships so there has to be a short plot with less characters
Less character development in short films
Short films generally have less character development or plot development or else focus on one particular character or event rather than a series of events.
Short films need to engage audience straight away whereas feature films can have more of a build up
short films have the ability to get across a powerful message in less time, so concentration is still at full
Short films are often a purer expression of art, as opposed to a money making/entertainment tool
short films can afford to be more abstract and visually focused as they do not need to capture the audience attention for as long.. short films are better at portraying an idea or concept whereas often (although not always) a long film focuses on a story (which may then have an underlying idea or concept however a short film can focus more purely on this)
Emotional impact
13/8/2013 15:43