Every year for the London Film Festival, I either see a whole load of films, or I basically don\u2019t see any at all. This year was in the former category, but even then, I only managed 11 films \u2013 although that feels like a lot. Especially if you see three films on a single day. (Yes, I know reviewers see more than this in a day). <\/p>\n\n\n\n
This year the LFF said that they\u2019d ensured that their programme saw 40% of their films having female directors. But I confess that none of the films I saw were directed by a woman. In my defence, my selection of films was made late in the day, and actually who<\/em> the director was only really mattered to me with one title \u2013 The Irishman<\/em>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n I find that my preferred way to pick films to see is to leaf through the printed programme. Then I use some Post-It notes to highlight everything that catches my eye. Given that I won\u2019t have heard of 99% of the titles, I\u2019m relying on the BFI\u2019s brief synopsis to \u201csell\u201d the film to me. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Then I go through again, removing some of the Post-Its when I realise that it\u2019ll all get too costly. And there are a few hard decisions to make when I realise that some titles clash with others. Even then, I have to work out what the running time is, factor in a Q&A after most films, and then see if there\u2019s enough time to cross town (or just change seats in the same cinema) to see the next film. <\/p>\n\n\n\n For the most part, I avoid films that are going to get a wide release fairly soon after the festival, although I don\u2019t always know that ahead of time. So, yes, I saw Official Secrets<\/em> on the basis of its subject matter, and I hadn\u2019t realised that it\u2019d get a full release the following week. <\/p>\n\n\n\n In retrospect, I should have checked more closely to see if screenings were for the hard of hearing. Two of the films I saw were, and while that\u2019s a great thing for those who are <\/em>hard of hearing, I can\u2019t pretend that I don\u2019t find subtitles distracting when I speak the language. HOH subtitles also include sound cues which can be a bit annoying. And they certainly mess up the timing of jokes as you invariably read the subtitles faster than the actors say the lines. <\/p>\n\n\n\n One theme I did find was that nearly half the films I saw were funded (at least in part) by either Amazon or Netflix. This wasn\u2019t on purpose \u2013 for the most part I only found this out when the credits rolled, and introduction mentioned it, or there was a logo on the poster. <\/p>\n\n\n\n While I would always prefer to watch a cinematic film in the cinema, there\u2019s obviously a trend towards the kind of films that reach festivals becoming \u201cstreaming\u201d titles. Studios have basically stopped making these mid-budget titles, and the big streaming platforms are becoming essential. Sometimes they\u2019re commissioning the films themselves; other times, they\u2019re picking up the titles at festivals like Sundance. (It\u2019s worth mentioning that Amazon and Netflix tend to have different release strategies, with Amazon titles much more likely to get a full run, whereas Netflix is often aiming for just a couple of weeks in cinemas before they hit the platform \u2013 something that it becoming much tougher to accomplish in the US. I note that Netflix has hired a Broadway theatre to show The Irishman<\/em> in New York, since many of the cinema chains won\u2019t play ball with them.) <\/p>\n\n\n\n