Short films are unique, moldable, and experimental in ways in that feature-length films aren't
Styles can be stretched and warped more than in popular features. Using techniques at their disposal in new and innovative ways, short films test the creativity of the artists.
<
(3 of 4)
Next argument >
The Argument
A short film, like its name suggests, is one that lasts for thirty minutes or less. The restricted time frame puts tremendous pressure on the film to convey its message effectively while retaining the attention of its viewers. Short films are often the yardstick used to measure an artist’s genius and grasp over their craft.[1]
Directors and writers often employ different techniques to ensure that they are able to put out more thought-provoking ideas with very few dialogues and actions. They utilize processes such as jump-cuts, made famous by Jean-Luc Godard, or even create silent films, such as those popularized by Charlie Chaplin. These techniques grab the reader's attention, much like Brecht’s idea of alienation, and because of the unfamiliarity they focus on the content being shown.
Because they are low budget and are streamed mostly on sites like Youtube, directors use short films to hone their skills and showcase new developments in the field of cinematography. It is where their creativity truly shines, and they should be promoted for them to be appreciated.
Counter arguments
Short films are one of the platforms through which people launch their careers. In today’s day and age, almost everyone has the ability to shoot their own short films. Ability does not equal talent, and there are quite a few amateurish works compared to the masterpieces. Because of the sheer number of short films being produced, there is a huge possibility of repetitiveness creeping in, which will diminish the already negligible attention given to this platform.
Proponents
Premises
[P1] - Short films make use of different techniques to help maintain the attention of their audience.