quote:

---

Help me send my new film to the British Board of Film Classification.

About this project

The British Board of Film Classification (previously known as the British Board of Film Censors) was established in 1912 to ensure films remained free of 'indecorous dancing', 'references to controversial politics' and 'men and women in bed together', amongst other perceived indiscretions.

Today, it continues to censor and in some cases ban films, while UK law ensures that, in effect, a film cannot be released in British cinemas without a BBFC certificate.

Each certificate costs around £1000 for a feature film of average length. For many independent filmmakers, such a large upfront can prove prohibitively expensive.



Luckily, there’s a flipside to all of this: while filmmakers are required to pay the BBFC to certify their work, the BBFC are also required to sit through whatever we pay them to watch.

That’s why I’m Kickstarting a BBFC certificate for my new film Paint Drying — a single, unbroken shot of white paint drying on a brick wall. All the money raised by this campaign (minus Kickstarter's fees) will be put towards the cost of the certificate, so the final length of the film will be determined by how much money is raised here.

For instance, if we raise £108.59, the film will be one minute long. If we raise £526.90, it'll be an hour long. And so on.

Risks and challenges

I've shot fourteen continuous hours of footage, on crisp 4K digital video. This should provide enough material for the film, as long as this campaign doesn't raise more than £6057.

If the campaign surpasses that figure, I'll reshoot the film with a longer runtime — which would also allow Paint Drying to overtake Jacques Rivette's Out 1 (with a runtime of 775 minutes) as the longest film ever rated by the BBFC.

---

HERE is the website showing the current running time of the movie.



Mashable article

How can you not be a part of this movie magic?
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 11-20-2015, 10:19 PM:
 
OK, there is serious chutzpah there. But I suspect that the filmmaker is selling himself short, and that Paint Drying could become a celebrated masterpiece of experimental cinema, written about by leading film theorists in universities the world over.

A couple of weeks ago I showed a 16mm movie for LA Film Forum which consisted of a static shot of a farmer's field, lasting for half an hour or so. OK, admittedly it was a bit more interesting than paint drying: the grass blew in the wind, people walked in and out of the frame stacking hay on a bale and that sort of stuff. It was actually quite hypnotic after a while.

But you get my point: the idea is hardly a new one. And if John Cage managed to become internationally famous by having concert audiences sitting in front of musicians doing nothing, then I have high hopes for the paint drying movie, above and beyond raising a two-fingered salute to the BBFC.

By the way, on leaving college in 1995, I applied for and was interviewed for a job as a film examiner with the BBFC. They emphasized that they couldn't really care what I thought about the controversies over A Clockwork Orange and Reservoir Dogs (because such controversies occupy a tiny part of their working day), but cared a lot about my knowledge of child development and my ability to make the right call as to what would be OK for a 10-year old to see but not a 5-year old. Needless to say, I didn't get the job.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-20-2015, 10:25 PM:
 
Really the trick here is going to be the sound mix, not the visual. That being said I do wish he would shoot it in lovely 2.76:1 even if he does shoot it on video (wouldn't you hate to be the projectionist running 2k changeovers?)

But again the trick here is the SOUND MIX. A mix of dead silence of the occasional wind blowing in the background just won't cut it. There must be something repetitive and HIGHLY ANNOYING, so that after 14 hours of that there is just no way they can get it out of their heads for a month.

Just imagine the sound of a couple of guys walking up and talking about some jibberish for a few seconds, then they say "hey man, crank up some tunes" while the one song that the movie licenses (Justin Bieber's Baby) starts.

Then when the song is over "hey man, play that again" and it starts up again.

Then repeat that last paragraph however many times it takes for the 14 hours or however long it ends up being.

Of course the lovely part of my idea is that the movie could really only be 3 PHYSICAL reels long. You have:
Reel 1
Reel 2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,etc
Reel 3,5,7,9,11,13,15,17,19,21,etc

That being said, does anyone know if there is a way to mandate no intermissions? And how long are the censors permitted to leave for restroom breaks? How about a strict no cell phone or electronic device rule? Hopefully they are required to view the film at reference volume too, as the filmmakers intended.

Hopefully Joe Redifer will make a similar movie for the MPAA, except of course instead of being really long and boring, it must be sexually offensive beyond their wildest dreams since that's about all that phases them.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 11-20-2015, 10:28 PM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

(wouldn't you hate to be the projectionist running 2k changeovers?)

---

The cue marks would make the audience jump out of their skin.

Afterthought - music - 1960s Easy Listening muzak until about reel 27, then some gangsta rap with lyrics celebrating pedophilia in highly explicit language. That would prove whether the BBFC examiner had actually bothered to sit through the whole show or not.

Again, nothing new: Derek Jarman's Blue consisted of a blank blue screen for 79 minutes, with the interesting stuff happening on the soundtrack.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-20-2015, 10:37 PM:
 
I like that afterthought, but I wonder how much it would take to license the music? (I suppose they could get some local garage band to make it...probably better that way anyway as long as the lyrics are easily understood.)

Do you think the Biebs would support the campaign with a $1 license fee?
 

---

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 11-20-2015, 11:07 PM:
 
Saskatchewan used to have its own Film Classification Board. In 1994, the board banned Exit to Eden due to a scene where a woman spanks a man with a hairbrush. This is Sexual Violence, and is Not Allowed.

Banning this movie immediately became front page news across the province, and the result was more interest in it than you can possibly imagine, and far more interest than it deserves (since it really is a ghawd-awful complete waste of perfectly good film and two hours of your life).

I know of one fellow who was actually arranging bus tours from Saskatchewan towns to theatres in Alberta for people to go and see it there!

A week later, the Film Classification Board changed its mind and slapped a Restricted 18+ rating on it so theatres here could play it. And was it ever HUGE! I sold tickets to people who I've never seen before or since. I remember one tiny little old lady who came tottering in the door on her cane, slowly shuffled up to me and said, "Is this the movie that they banned?" I said, "Yes, it is." She replied, "Oh good!" and put her money on the counter.

Saskatchewan is probably the only place on the planet where Exit to Eden made a killing! If they had just slapped a Restricted rating on it at the beginning and left it at that, it would have played for one week in the biggest cities and quietly disappeared when nobody cared. Instead, everybody had to see it and I do mean EVERYBODY. People were coming out from under rocks to watch that thing.

Not too long after that the Saskatchewan Film Classification Board outsourced the job of classifying movies to the BC Film Classification Board. While the Saskatchewan Film Classification Board still exists in theory and on paper (I get a license from them every year to operate my theatre), the actual job of classifying the movies is done in British Columbia.

I'm not entirely certain this is a cause-and-effect situation but it seems awfully coincidental that the film classification function was farmed out that way shortly after the big scandal surrounding the banning of Exit to Eden.
 

---

Posted by Rex Oliver (Member # 7593) on 11-21-2015, 12:23 AM:
 
How bout making a movie of grass growing?
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 11-21-2015, 09:16 AM:
 
Again, nothing new:
Warhol's Sleep - 5 hours of John Girono sleeping. Warhol's Sleep

And Warhol's Empire: A single shot of the Empire State Building from early evening until nearly 3 am the next day. 485 Big Action Minutes. Warhol's Empire
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-21-2015, 06:01 PM:
 
I had to run Blue http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0106438/?ref_=fn_tt_tt_41

And it was on 20 minute reels no less...when the curator of the facility came into the booth while the movie was running...I'd go to the projector running an adjust focus and framing a bit...she eventually "got it."
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 11-21-2015, 08:43 PM:
 
When Blue came out, a co-worker told me that in another arthouse nearby, the projectionist had snipped out a frame from the end of a reel, put it in a slide and projected it with a Kodak Carousel, while the audio played from the 35mm print, as an experiment to see if anyone noticed. Apparently, no-one did.

I've no idea if this actually happened or is an urban legend; I suspect the latter.
 

---

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 11-22-2015, 12:07 AM:
 
Wonder if this will include one frame of something offensive someplace in the middle, just to see if anyone notices it and rates it accordingly?
 

---

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 11-22-2015, 04:33 PM:
 
Paint Drying - in 3D, Dolby Atmos, 4K, HDR, IMAX, Auro 3D. 70mm in selected theatres.
 

---

Posted by Mark Hajducki (Member # 1732) on 11-22-2015, 05:28 PM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

But again the trick here is the SOUND MIX. A mix of dead silence of the occasional wind blowing in the background just won't cut it. There must be something repetitive and HIGHLY ANNOYING, so that after 14 hours of that there is just no way they can get it out of their heads for a month.

Just imagine the sound of a couple of guys walking up and talking about some jibberish for a few seconds, then they say "hey man, crank up some tunes" while the one song that the movie licenses (Justin Bieber's Baby) starts.

---

quote:

---

On receipt of a written request for reconsideration, the BBFC will ensure that the work, or the relevant parts of the work, are viewed again, including by senior staff.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

But again the trick here is the SOUND MIX. A mix of dead silence of the occasional wind blowing in the background just won't cut it. There must be something repetitive and HIGHLY ANNOYING, so that after 14 hours of that there is just no way they can get it out of their heads for a month.

---

Binaural beats in Atmos?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhIbIf8UtMA

The Song that Doesn't End?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0U2zJOryHKQ
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-09-2015, 08:40 PM:
 
Maybe the sound of a dog barking. Then after about 15 minutes he stops barking JUST long enough for you to think he's done barking, and then he starts again only louder. Repeat.
 

---

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 12-09-2015, 11:00 PM:
 
http://paint.ginnter.net/

Currently over 13 hours of paint drying funded.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 12-10-2015, 09:33 AM:
 
Or a car alarm going off at timed intervals.
 

---

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 7758) on 12-10-2015, 11:39 AM:
 
Mike and Martin, you are brilliant. Since these annoyances are a routine issue in my otherwise quiet neighborhood, I should volunteer to record these in surround sound. A nearby yard containing the World's Most Annoying and Rabid German Shepherd periodically drives us nuts, so I think we have the ideal subject. Car alarms are easy to arrange too.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 12-10-2015, 12:27 PM:
 
All hail the Hypnotoad! http://youtu.be/zHU2RlSCdxU
 

---

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 12-10-2015, 09:35 PM:
 
I would think you'd need 4 reels. One with opening credits, one with closing, and two that you go back and forth between.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-26-2016, 10:15 AM:
 
So apparently it is 10 hours and 7 minutes long.



And it appears they did the screening yesterday.

Two BBFC examiners are currently watching 'Paint Drying'

quote:

---

Today's the day. Right now, two BBFC examiners are sitting in a screening room in the basement of the BBFC's Soho Square offices, watching the first 9 hours of 'Paint Drying'.

The remaining 67 minutes will be watched tomorrow morning, after which the examiners will write up their notes and prepare the film's certificate.

To mark the occasion, I'm doing an AMA on Reddit (the previous one was taken down as crowdfunding AMAs are apparently not allowed). If you have any questions, please do ask them there.

---

quote:

---

SUMMARY: PAINT DRYING is a film showing paint drying on a wall

---

LOL
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-26-2016, 04:40 PM:
 
Yet another movie released in 2016 with a bland movie title.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 01-27-2016, 05:43 PM:
 
There aren't many people who can claim, truthfully, that they were paid to watch paint dry, but these examiners can.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 01-27-2016, 11:04 PM:
 
I would bet the lot of them knew exactly what they were going to be watching and brought a good supply of books, crossword puzzles or their cellphones with them.

I get the whole "quirky protest" thing, but does anybody think a board such as this is unnecessary? Is there any chance of it being abolished, or any other changes made, due to protests like this?
 

---

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 01-27-2016, 11:13 PM:
 
How many corner store video rental places (assuming there are any left) enforce film ratings? What about cable television at home?

I can see the point of posting advisories but the same argument can be made for tv and Internet video as well. (What are the chances? Slim and none, and Slim left town.)

Theatres are just a big and visible target.

A while back the Saskatchewan Film Classification Board (such as it is -- see my earlier postings about that) sent out a survey to theatres with proposed changes to the Saskatchewan Film and Video Classification Act. One of the proposed changes was that they wanted to have a special fee for classification for things like film festivals, but that classification would be valid only for that particular event and if you wanted to show it again later on you would have to pay for it to be classified again. I responded that this is just a grab for fees since a film's classification will never change unless that nebulous thing called "community standards" changes. Haven't heard anything more about that since then, actually.
 

---

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 01-28-2016, 03:15 AM:
 

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

I would bet the lot of them knew exactly what they were going to be watching and brought a good supply of books, crossword puzzles or their cellphones with them.

---

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

I get the whole "quirky protest" thing, but does anybody think a board such as this is unnecessary? Is there any chance of it being abolished, or any other changes made, due to protests like this?

---

quote: Randy Stankey

---

By now, any reasonably intelligent person knows or should know that "unsavory" content exists and can be found virtually anywhere. Such reasonable persons should know where to look if they want to see such things and they should know where NOT to look if they DON'T want to see them.

---

Kids, man. It's all about protecting the kids.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 01-28-2016, 11:21 AM:
 
Has the trailer been released yet?
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 01-28-2016, 11:54 AM:
 
If I understood the Kickstarter page correctly, the issue is that (Leo--correct me if I am wrong about this) a BBFC certificate is required for any film to be exhibited in a British cinema and that the process of doing so is often cost prohibitive to smaller productions. Thus, I interpreted this campaign as being less about censorship and more about cost.

The MPAA charges similar fees, but at least the process is entirely voluntary.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 01-28-2016, 12:43 PM:
 
You can't get a job as an electrician unless you are a member of the Electrician's Union but you can't become a member of the Electrician's Union unless you have a job working as an electrician.
 

---

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 01-28-2016, 02:10 PM:
 
I am under the impression that the MPAA process is "voluntary" but if you don't volunteer no theatre will play your movie.

Here in the Great White North we don't play word games like that. It's simply illegal to show an unclassified movie in a theatre and that's all there is to that.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 01-28-2016, 02:18 PM:
 
The MPAA is a private organization, in fact the lobbying wing of the motion picture biz, so can't make anything illegal (despite the way the ratings warnings are worded). They claim one of the purposes of the ratings is to keep legal censors from returning to the movie biz.

Plenty of theatres run unrated films, but they tend to be art theatres and art house films. There are theatres that will refuse to run unrated films. And there are landlords who contractually obligate them to showing only rated films, and often nothing "worse" than an "R" rating.

As the major studios are what compromise the MPAA, they are all required to get their films rated due to their membership therein. I think one of the perks of membership is they don't have to pay for a rating. Non-MPAA members have to pay to get their films rated.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 01-28-2016, 03:20 PM:
 
That's correct. In some ways it would be nicer if it was a "law" for kids not to go to R-rated movies, because it would prevent a lot of arguments with parents over things like "is it really THAT BAD?" and kids begging for the folks to drop them off, etc.
 

---

Posted by Mark Hajducki (Member # 1732) on 01-28-2016, 07:51 PM:
 

quote: Frank Cox

---

What about cable television at home?

---

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

In some ways it would be nicer if it was a "law" for kids not to go to R-rated movies, because it would prevent a lot of arguments with parents over things like "is it really THAT BAD?" and kids begging for the folks to drop them off, etc.

---

quote: Scott Norwood

---

If I understood the Kickstarter page correctly, the issue is that (Leo--correct me if I am wrong about this) a BBFC certificate is required for any film to be exhibited in a British cinema and that the process of doing so is often cost prohibitive to smaller productions.

---

The "is required" bit is a gray area. The BBFC is a private company, whose ratings for theatrical releases carry no legal force.

In order to charge members of the public to walk into your premises to see a movie, you have to have a cinema license issued by your local council. This license has a long list of conditions (most of which are about safety, fire exits and that sort of stuff), one of which is that you will observe BBFC rulings unless the council decides, on a case-by-case basis, to let you screen a movie that the BBFC has not passed (or with a lower age rating), or to not let you screen a movie that it has (or with a higher age rating).

Officially, the BBFC claims that its role is purely to "advise" the local authorities that issue the licenses, and that no-one is compelled to pay them to have their movie "classified". In reality, however, if you try to bypass the BBFC, you will be faced with dealing with hundreds of local councils individually, assuming you want to release your film nationwide, many of whom will refuse to look at it unless the BBFC has first.

For consumer video publication, however, the BBFC does have legal teeth: under the Video Recordings Act 1984 it is the "designated authority" for classifying (rating) releases. If I were to open a cinema and play a double bill of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Salo, or the 120 Days of Sodom at a Sunday kids matinee, the worst that could happen would be that the council would revoke my cinema license, and I'd go out of business. However, if I sold DVDs of them to a 10-year old, I could be sent to jail.

For essentially this reason (the Video Act), I don't think that the BBFC's claim that they are an advisory service, the use of which is entirely voluntary by filmmakers and distributors, cuts a lot of ice. It is effectively impossible to release a movie in the UK, either theatrically or on retail video, without paying them to rate it, and for lower budget productions, that cost is probably a significant obstacle.

As a free speech safeguard, the theatrical release system sort of works, but in all the high profile cases in which the BBFC's decision has been overruled at a local level, that decision was made in the first place, meaning that they still had to be paid, and that criticism of the BBFC on the grounds of cost is, IMHO, justified.
 

---

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 02-10-2016, 12:14 PM:
 
I'm waiting for the sequel, "Screen Saver - The Motion Picture".
 

---

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 02-10-2016, 03:37 PM:
 
Some screensavers can be really cool. I use xscreensaver on all of my computers and have some of them set to a "slideshow" that goes through my pictures directory and randomly displays stuff it finds there, scaled up to full-screen size. Since I have a ton of clip art and wallpaper photos, not to mention technical diagrams and the like, there's some really interesting things that pop up.

My wife uses the same thing on her computer, displaying random photos of quilts and quilt designs.

It's really quite entertaining.
 

---