Austinist: SXSW Film Schedules, Panels and Trailers

Grape Ape

Sat, 16 Feb 2008 12:57:44 -0600

You totally missed the point of my comment. I think we are having two entirely different conversations because you've lost me in this "access" discussion. I never questioned who gets what access. After 14 years of attending the event I think I've figured that part out. I was simply stating that people who pay $70 always complain about getting bumped by badge holders and that my point is you get what you pay for. I wasn't discussing what a badge versus pass does for you or whether its worth it or not.

cram

Sat, 16 Feb 2008 12:53:37 -0600

A badge purchased just for movie screenings is a horrible waste of money. At $300, a badge holder who watches 20 movies is paying $15 per movie. I don't have any interest in ever attending the film part of SXSW, but I assume the premium you pay for the badge to see the movies months before 99% of other people is analogous to buying a music badge and seeing some larger bands in smaller venues (ie, REM at Stubbs this year, etc). If that's your hobby, passion, interest, whatever -- it's not a horrible waste of money, right? (Unless you want to get philosophical and argue that the entire conference and American way of spending money is a waste)

seth

Sat, 16 Feb 2008 09:48:25 -0600

Grape, I absolutely read what you wrote, and that's what I was quoting and responding to. People that buy badges enjoy the added value over passes by getting into panel discussions and other exclusive programming. A badge purchased just for movie screenings is a horrible waste of money. At $300, a badge holder who watches 20 movies is paying $15 per movie. That's to see studio films like Harold & Kumar at twice the price of admission for it's impending theatrical run. If that badger avoids the studio films and watches only the truly independent films, some of them will be worth the premium of $15 apiece. Some won't be. Passes should be for people who don't care to attend panel discussions and just want to see movies. Badges should be for people who want access to the premium content as well as watch some movies. $15 per roll of the dice is a bit high for the gamble of finding the gems at SXSW film. Have I fully acknowledged the difference in access levels between passes and badges now? Seth

Grape Ape

Sat, 16 Feb 2008 08:10:18 -0600

Did you even read what I wrote Seth? I believe what you were trying to quote was "Why people feel that buying the cheapest option should afford them the same access as a badge holder is beyond me." See the difference between what you took out of context and what was actually written? Reading is fundamental and it helps you understand what people actually write too.

seth

Sat, 16 Feb 2008 07:05:48 -0600

"the same access as a badge holder is beyond me." It's not the same access. Badges grant access to all the panel discussions, parties, and other programmed content. Just like the difference between music badges and wristbands. In the case of the film fest, however, pass holders are far less successful getting into theaters than the wristbanders getting into music venues. Seth

math

Fri, 15 Feb 2008 21:10:42 -0600

I think my advice is perfectly reasonable: **IF YOU DON'T WANT TO PAY BIG MONEY** for premium access, a pass is a good alternative. That's all I'm sayin'. I don't think anybody's dumb enough to expect it'll afford them the same level of access a badge will (it quite obviously won't, otherwise who'd buy a badge?). And there is certainly the possibility you'll get turned away from a screening, especially if you don't get there super early. This rejection may leave you feeling sad or angry or both. It happens, and it's reasonable to expect when you pay less money for second-tier access. But if you make the right choices and get there on time, you can see tons of good stuff for relatively little money. And yes, please thank me when you do. I like being thanked.

Grape Ape

Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:43:48 -0600

The main thing to remember is that you get what you pay for. Why people feel that buying the cheapest option should afford them the same access as a badge holder is beyond me. The sense of entitlement in this town is sometimes absurd. Maybe they should only allow access to people who have actual film credentials to be part of the festival instead of charging a mere $70 for 10 days worth of viewing options. I understand that $70 is a lot of money - but will you remember that when you're paying $8 to see a single film? Probably not, just like the people who bitch about the price of a music wristband while standing at Stubb's watching the one band they just paid $30 to see.

seth

Fri, 15 Feb 2008 19:59:35 -0600

I think Grape Ape summed it up perfectly. While SXSW music might be do-able with wristbands, the film fest is really aimed at badges. Unlike Math's mighty one-year's worth of experience of SXSW on a pass, I did the fest for 4 years on passes starting in the 1998. More recently, the festival has blown up with badges and especially dorks with platinums. Three years ago, when my pass couldn't get me into ANY of the three screenings of Sarah Silverman's "Jesus is Magic." I realized there weren't enough concurrent venues for all the badges. So in 2006, I got a badge and even got fired from my job to see movies. I watched as pass holders waited in line for over an hour only to be turned away at the Paramount. In today's SXSW Film Fest, a pass is not like the music festival wrist band. So if you're reading this debate, do as you choose. Buy a pass or don't. For those who do purchase the pass, thank Math for his advice every time you get turned away from a screening that you took off from work to see. Seth

Grape Ape

Fri, 15 Feb 2008 19:02:17 -0600

They don't oversell badges. The event is designed for badge holders.

math

Fri, 15 Feb 2008 18:39:43 -0600

I speak from my one year of experience going to SXSW Film with a pass (the following year, I decided I wanted to see more movies, so I shelled out for a badge). That year, I only got shut out of one (1) film I wanted to see (which is why I qualified that line in this post with a "pretty much"), and that was because I showed up a lazy 15 minutes before showtime. Certainly, you have to be willing to invest some time, and it'll depend on your work schedule, but MOST of the big titles are totally do-able. Last year, for example, the badge line for "Knocked Up" wrapped all the way around the block, three people wide--and a good chunk of the pass line still got in. I know because two of my friends had passes last year and I had a badge, so I'd go in and save seats, then they'd come in after and bring me beer. Obviously, there'll be some exceptions, but they'll be few and far between, and they'll probably be films you'll eventually get to see at the theatre anyway (BTW, word is that Shine a Light is mediocre at best. You might be better off not getting in). As far as getting into "cream-of-the-crop films", well, I suppose that depends on your taste. If you want "the industry" to decide what you'll like, then I suppose festivals aren't your cup of tea to begin with. You should probably just check the box office report and go see whatever's number one (last weekend it was "Fool's Gold". Great pick, industry!). But personally, I've found that the best festival films are the ones that come out of nowhere. Last year, "Helvetica" was one of my favorite movies. I also really liked "Murder Party". And "Frownland". And "Fish Kill Flea". And "Confessions of a Superhero". And "I'm a Cyborg but That's Okay". None of which had big theatrical runs, and none of which were "made by rich filmschool kids" (as opposed to poor, major media conglomerates, I guess?). Anyhoo, it's obviously a tradeoff. And a pass will end up being what you make of it. It's not perfect, but it's a great alternative if you don't want to pay the big bucks for premium access.

seth

Fri, 15 Feb 2008 18:24:06 -0600

Fastla, I hate 'internet arguments' and really am not debating you. I'm just trying to draw attention to the fact that SXSW oversells badges and the film fest isn't accessible to people without badges. Regarding the Paramount screenings, I intentionally used those films as examples knowing that even though they'll probably premiere at the Paramount, pass holders won't get in. The year before last year these films premiered at the Paramount, and not a SINGLE pass holder got in. Not even all the badges got in: Beastie Boys documentary Scanner Darkly Prairie Home Companion And Scanner Darkly was at 4:00 PM while the Beastie Boys documentary was in the early evening. You're absolutely correct. Some SXSW films are made by talented filmmakers who are amazing folks. On a fair number of occasions I've been witness to some utter garbage that got into SXSW because of high production values on a non-studio production. 'The Lost' from the year-before-last is one such piece of crap created by recent film school grads with rich parents. As for the overselling of badges, I'll happily bet ANYONE $50 that no passholders get into the Rolling Stones documentary premiere at the Paramount. Wanna take me up on that? Seth

Fastla

Fri, 15 Feb 2008 17:25:31 -0600

I'm going to slightly disagree with you there. As someone who's volunteered on the film side of the festival for the past two years I can tell you that MANY pass holders make it into the "big" movies. Mainly because the Paramount holds so many people (something like 1500 if I remember correctly). Many of the screenings you listed above are playing at the Paramount and I'm fairly sure you can get into them. I've found that if your patient, and yes, if you can take the weekdays off, you can get into almost every theater and see some really good films, including some gems that for one reason or another don't get distributed (The Life of Reilly is a perfect example). The only exception is the downtown Alamo. The theaters there sit about 180 in the larger theater and 85 in the small. If the movie has even a small amount of buzz, it's going to fill out with badges. But honestly, the film pass is for the movie lover on a budget, if you HAVE to see a movie, then you shell out the bucks for a badge. And by the way, having talked to several filmmakers at SXSW, they are truly amazing folks who work really hard for a flick only a few thousand people will ever see if they're lucky. Having money doesn't get you into SXSW, unless you're Andy Dick.

seth

Fri, 15 Feb 2008 16:43:42 -0600

"pretty much any screening you want" does not include: Scorcese documentary about the Rolling Stones Harold and Kumar @ Guantanamo 21 Battle in Seattle Beautiful Losers And many others. Badges crush pass holders who are even at the front of the pass line. The other reason passes are a bust is the numbers. The festival runs like 9 days. You better be able to take off work and get out to see some films on weekdays if you're going to even see 10 movies during this period. And since you're scraping by getting into screenings that don't fill up with badge people, you're not getting into the cream-of-the-crop films. If you see 10 movies, you still paid $7.70 to see each one of them, of which, several are utter crap made by rich filmschool kids who had more of their parents' money than ideas. You'll wish you would have let the industry sort the quality from the garbage and waited until the good SXSW movies got released by distributors. Seth