Yesterday, the producers of the Your Big Break New Zealand contest announced their five finalists. Sadly for me, my entry was not chosen.
But happily, I am a learner, and the whole process taught me so much – about writing, about pitching, about storyboarding, about pre-production planning, and about how easy it is to work hard when you're passionate and hungry for experience.
That's what I learned from developing my project. Now, on to the meat! What I learned from losing:
"Losing" vs. Not Being Chosen
Just because my entry wasn't chosen doesn't mean I "lost" anything. Quite the opposite! I gained a ton of practical, hands-on experience.
You could argue that I lost time – well, any learning takes time.
I lost an opportunity? Nope – opportunities come and go. This was one, others are coming.
I lost face? Nah – most of the people I begged to vote for me were impressed that I had the ballsiness to a) put my fledgling project on display for the whole world to judge, and b) wear my heart on my sleeve, admit I couldn't do it alone, and ask for help.
Which reminds me – I gained a new appreciation for my friends and colleagues.
As individuals, we're amazing; team us up, and we're profoundly powerful.
Ten percent of my address book voted for me. Not much, you say? I have almost 900 people in my address book.
A month ago, if you had asked me, I'd have told you I had no idea how to get 90 people I know to do anything. Sure, I'm trained in public speaking and persuasive writing, but with this project, I had to get my message out quickly. I learned a lot about leveraging the power of social media – sites like Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn were crucial to getting the word out. Even direct email played a strong part in gaining eyeballs.
So, did I lose? Heck, no.
I clearly gained experience, process and strategy know-how, and new appreciation for people and technology.
I came out ahead.
Safe/Commercial vs. Funny/Viral
I may have doomed my effort from the start by missing the importance of one sentence in the project brief: "This is not about making a commercial for New Zealand – you can take any angle on this you wish."
Now clearly, if you read my script, you can see I wrote a commercial. This was a "safe" choice. I thought that, since the contest was sponsored by Tourism New Zealand, they would ultimately "go for" whatever projects were most likely to drum up tourism for the islands.
Not so.
Of the five finalists, four were comedies set in New Zealand. Color me surprised! Until, that is, I go back to the brief, and read: "It might be funny, sad, evocative, exciting, shocking or simply beautiful."
In my zeal to please the judges I'd imagined, I missed out on the significance of this one word. Is it significant that "funny" is mentioned first? Were they hoping for funny all along?
I could run this 'round and 'round in my head until I'm blue in the face. What it comes down to is, had I only thought of this theory, I would have written a very different script:
Judges ultimately want short videos that are entertaining enough to go viral, and when they do go viral, they will get so many people thinking about X, that they will eventually Y.
Viral is the trend, isn't it? Why? ROI. Entertaining videos that spread themselves must have a higher ROI than predictable videos that bribe their way onto the airwaves, only to be shown once and never seen again.
Viral video is word-of-mouth advertising. And word-of-mouth advertising sells more cost-effectively than TV, print, and online advertising. And what goes viral better than comedy?
Who doesn't need a laugh? Check the Most Viewed page on YouTube and it's easy to see. Comedy gets eyeballs. Comedy goes viral.
You can be sure I'll be testing out this theory on my next project. Oh, yes.
(See, this is what I mean by learning. And it's why I'm in love with failure: failure teaches me so much. If I'm afraid to fail, I'm afraid to learn. And I'm not about to stop learning, so – welcome, Failure, do come in, let's chat over tea, let's talk about what just happened, let's figure out what we can do better next time.)
Rules vs. "Squishy" Rules
Logical types obey rules. Artsy types break rules.
The downloadable brief mentioned that submitters should provide a "60 second video pitch". Rule? People pitching over this time limit will be automatically disqualified?
Well… not so.
Four of the five finalists' pitch videos were over 1:30.
Some folks cried foul (you can search for @YourBigBreakNZ on Twitter) – but should a desirable entry be disqualified on a technicality?
No. But it's worth discussing.
The rules-lawyer in me says "yes" – you ignore a basic rule, you get penalized.
But that only sees things from a contestant's perspective: "I'm a contestant, I played by the rules, I should have an advantage over people who broke the rules."
What about the judges' perspective? Does it make sense to disqualify an entry that is entertaining and could easily go viral?
No. No, it really doesn't.
So as much as we planner-types like to play by stated rules, when it comes down to it:
If a judge falls in love with your entry, then it doesn't matter if your pitch video is twice as long as the rules say it can be.
Knowing this, you can bet that my next pitch video will take all the time it needs for me to sell my story.
(Though I'm guessing that blathering on for a full two minutes would be too long. This is supposed to be an elevator pitch, after all. I'll be aiming for 1:00 to 1:45.)
Better Luck Next Time?
How about:
Better work next time.
Luck has nothing to do with it.* If I can learn from my mistakes, I can avoid making them again. Kaizen.
If this has been helpful to you, why not drop me a clue cookie, and let me know you've been here, and what you think? Leave a comment.
*Yes, serendipity happens, but that's circumstance, not luck. That's a discussion for a whole 'nother time.
Update: The five finalists's films are now online at http://your-big-blog.com/2010/02/23/the-films-are-online/ . Check them out.
I still have so much to learn.
Well stated. But if you are learning from the experience, did you fail? Did Failure enter your abode for tea, or did you get fooled by an impostor in a Failure suit? You’re such a sucker for a pretty suit, aren’t you!?!
You know who you DID beat? Whoever did the commercial for Le Cordon Blue school of culinary arts! That fool forgot to add the audio to the final cut… I’ve seen the commercial now like 5 times (now you must ask yourself: is he just sitting there watching endless TV, or are they playing the damn commercial WAY TO MANY TIMES?) and not once have I heard any audio. But, then again, I do notice the stupid commercial every time it comes on because the lack of noise catches my attention immediately… maybe they’re onto something! I even remembered what the product was… wait a tic… I’ve been duped! Damn you Chicken Cordon Blue University!!!
Joe, you slay me
But I’m so confused! Should I purposely leave the audio out of my next project? Or should I make sure I leave it in? Decisions, decisions! ;0
I think the 60 second guideline was a good one… there are tons of entries with a 3-4 minute video where I found myself dozing off around the 30 second mark. The only longer videos that got my attention were the ones that already sold me on their idea after 60 seconds anyway…
Also, the rule was clarified in the critic’s FAQ:
“Does the supporting material have to be 60 seconds long?
You have the option of loading either an image or video as your supporting material. If you choose video, it does not HAVE to be 60 seconds long but we recommend keeping it concise and to the point. Like an elevator pitch. You’ll only have one chance of getting the attention of the judges so the clearer your thinking the better your chances are of standing out.”
Mel, thanks for the valuable insight! I’ll admit that I have avoided failure — and so avoided learning — a number of times in my life. Polly, put the kettle on. Let’s all have tea!
Yeah – any good pitch for a 3-minute short film should be under 2 minutes. Any more than that, and you might as well just read the script aloud
Mm, the sweet tea of failure
We’ve all avoided failure. It’s natural to not want to appear foolish in front of others. But there’s power in taking that risk, and massive power in embracing that risk.
Regarding artists not playing by the rules, I remember going to the studio with my band a decade ago (my, has it been that long?) and the owner was surprised that we were on time. I readily admit that was my fault.
Of course, there was rule breaking in the studio… In the form of lawbreaking, when the marijuana was whipped out. I was too much of a good boy to participate in that. Why mention it? Artists just work on different wavelengths. There’s really no such thing as a “time limit”, what matters first is grabbing attention and getting your point across; and second is the presentation of such. For example, your explainer video could have been five seconds: “MY MOVIE WILL F*** YOU!!” That would have grabbed a viewers attention, and perhaps gotten your point across… But not in the right way. (That’s something I would have done, under the starting assumption that there’s no way I’ll win, so mine as well make it funny. But my impending Middle Eastern Studies degree also speaks to my failure as an artist.)
Anyways, look at “rules” as non-ridge guidelines. I try making things as short and piffy as possible, but that’s the punk rock dude in me speaking.
Adam, I hear ya – break rules as needed. I’ve got some habits to unlearn
Eveyone, I received an email from Barrie Osborne, Producer of the Your Big Break contest, last night. I think it’s classy, so I’m sharing it here:
“Dear Your Big Break participants, I would like to thank you for the amount and quality of the work produced for this competition. As a filmmaker myself, it is truly inspiring to witness so much new talent. New Zealand is a wonderful place to tell stories and make films. It is gratifying to see that has clearly inspired each of you as it continues to inspire us. Although there could only be five finalists many more concepts presented to us deserve to come to fruition. I wish you all the best in the competition and in your future endeavors. Barrie”
Hey! I’m not the only one who loves failure! Check out this episode of The Sassy Ladies on BlogTalkRadio – they talk about the role of failure at 14 min 30 sec:
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/sassyladies/2009/09/09/theatrical-intelligence-and-your-business-savvy
Good essay, Mel! Being someone who tends to be risk-aversive, you inspire me to go for it more often. Really, how much can you lose by trying? Congrats on taking part in the contest, learning from it, and sharing. Better luck-er, I mean hard work- next time!
Thanks! Always glad to inspire!
“Risk-aversive” – you’ve reminded me of a recent post by Wil Wheaton, about the “Lizard Brain” in all of us. Link, link… ah, here it is! http://wilwheaton.typepad.com/wwdnbackup/2010/02/this-post-brought-to-you-by-wils-lizard-brain.html
Enjoy! I’ve got to get back to beating my own Lizard Brain with a stick. LB’s making me procrastinate instead of writing my business plan! Stupid LB!