I would take Zi off the list. Kogonada is a well-known filmmaker who worked with A-list actors in After Yang. This is probably not a good example of cold submission.
Great analysis and thank you for showing how closed the top festivals are. A lot of first time filmmakers are unaware of this and still submit.
This would not be as bad if press and industry (distributors) did not attend exclusively the top festivals you mentioned. 99.99% of movies made by “outsiders” are siloed into festivals (regional, national, B or C-list) that can neither promote them nor help with distribution as everything is concentrated at the top. And it’s a system with no “upward mobility,” which sadly mirrors what we see in society at large. No wonder young filmmakers turn to YouTube.
Anyway, festivals have an uncertain future themselves.
The part you can't measure, unfortunately, is the "cold" submitter who has a friend of a friend in the selection committee or whatever and did all that self-representation work before even submitting to the festival.
As a former film festival programmer (Whistler), I can say these results are not surprising. The fact is most truly cold submissions are really bad, low budget and amateurish. Funders, distributors and sales agents act as a quality filtration system for the industry, as most scripts are submitted to them at some point. Of course, the occasional cold gem can exceptionally present itself, but quality films rarely arrive on a programmer’s desk without being vetted at some previous stage by various professionals in the process.
Imagine a Godard script (or lack thereof) being vetted by a lab, then his film being vetted by a sales agent and a distributor before landing on a festival screener’s desk and then a head programmer’s one. There probably would have been no Nouvelle Vague.
And I thought that discovering new talents was one of the programmer’s jobs...
Finding great movies is a festival programmer’s job. If that sometimes involves discovering new talent, so much the better. The only exception would be if you were programming a targeted festival or a sidebar strand specifically devoted to first features and emerging talent.
Godard movies always arrived for consideration by North America festival programmers with distribution or sales agents attached. I wasn’t around for Breathless (1960), but from that moment on, his films had representation because Breathless had been such a defining international hit. His films would not be considered “cold” under the terms of this Stephen Follows analysis.
Why North America? I didn't even think about America since Breathless success came mostly through its Vigo prize and Berlin International Film festival where Godard won the Silver Bear. Granted, it was probably not the best example but not for the reasons you mentioned: simply because it wasn't a cold submission. Back then, festivals had no open submissions.
Plus Godard was very connected and Breathless already had opened in Paris and was a hit with audiences and critics before Berlin. A totally different world where movies could be released *and then* selected at festivals - which, in a way, makes sense.
But it's a good example of how not everything has to be vetted *ahead* of production or festival selection. Godard took a risk to make this movie and only after it was made it was judged by the industry. If it had to go through today’s filters, it probably would not have been made or it would have been so distorted by the endless 'labs' and all the great advices that everybody in this industry is always ready to give to film directors that it would probably have lost what makes it unique. In short, we need de-institutionalization.
"The fact is most truly cold submissions are really bad, low budget and amateurish." That is a stunning comment and an insult to outsider artists and filmmakers everywhere. So any filmmaker without the 'cultural capital' (as Pierre Bourdieu would call it) to navigate your 'quality filtration system' isn't worth a second look?
I too programmed for 10+ years at a festival (Slamdance) where a large proportion, if not an outright majority, of the competition line-up comes from 'cold' submissions. Some of those films went on to receive critical and commercial success. I won't bore you with a long alumni list but you can start with Christopher Nolan.
Yes, I know you will reply that it's the heroic programmer's job to find these diamonds in the rough and so on... But your initial comment distills the mentality that plagues the A-list festivals. I wish they'd just express that sentiment more openly so outsider filmmakers can stop wasting their money on submission fees.
And this is to say nothing about how A-list festivals are beholden to talent agencies, studios, attorneys, sponsors, and institutions that influence what gets programmed. It's not just a closed system but a system subject to corporate and institutional power.
Thank you so much for doing this work!! I had a suspicion the numbers were like this, but it's so good to have it confirmed. And sooooo helpful for filmmakers who feel crushed by rejection when they submit "cold."
Great stuff. It would be interesting to go a step further and look at the accepted "cold" films and determine what percentage of them were directed by white guys.
Beyond that it would be interesting to be able to compare that number to the percentage of "cold" projects submitted by white men, as white men are about 30% of the US population (and apparently they're about 35% of people in Canada), but I can only assume they're still overrepresented in submissions.
I'd love to see these numbers festival by festival, especially in a North American context (Sundance, TIFF, SxSW, Tribecca, etc.), because the sense I have is that the identitarian social justice situation didn't hit the European festivals as hard between 2020 and 2025, but it was clearly playing a huge role in North America (and presumably still is, even if those representing the whole thing aren't being so loud and blatant as they were about it a few years ago). Things also seem to have looked even more skewed in same direction in the context of grants, fellowships, foundations, etc.
Honestly they should all just end open submissions. It would be far more honest and fair. Having open submissions makes people think that’s how it works, and they put their effort and money into the wrong places.
Thank you for this, must have been an immense undertaking to research all of these films. Helpful in so many ways and ultimately confirms the cynical perspective each filmmaker has that there is no hope when you are filmmaker without the right connections. “Thems the breaks!”
Though i’m wondering why a film by Kogonada would be included? Wouldn’t that be a direct contradiction of your criteria given that he’s a successful filmmaker with a track record and all of the connections one can only dream of? Confusing.
This is why for my money the “genre” circuit is more exciting for discovering talent - fantastic, fantasia, Sitges, etc
Amazing work. A bit bleak, but better to have the truth out there! Killing it Follows!
Wow, important to know. Thanks for doing, what appears to be, super challenging research on this subject.
I would take Zi off the list. Kogonada is a well-known filmmaker who worked with A-list actors in After Yang. This is probably not a good example of cold submission.
Great analysis and thank you for showing how closed the top festivals are. A lot of first time filmmakers are unaware of this and still submit.
This would not be as bad if press and industry (distributors) did not attend exclusively the top festivals you mentioned. 99.99% of movies made by “outsiders” are siloed into festivals (regional, national, B or C-list) that can neither promote them nor help with distribution as everything is concentrated at the top. And it’s a system with no “upward mobility,” which sadly mirrors what we see in society at large. No wonder young filmmakers turn to YouTube.
Anyway, festivals have an uncertain future themselves.
The part you can't measure, unfortunately, is the "cold" submitter who has a friend of a friend in the selection committee or whatever and did all that self-representation work before even submitting to the festival.
Very true. Not all privilege or advantage is on the surface
As a former film festival programmer (Whistler), I can say these results are not surprising. The fact is most truly cold submissions are really bad, low budget and amateurish. Funders, distributors and sales agents act as a quality filtration system for the industry, as most scripts are submitted to them at some point. Of course, the occasional cold gem can exceptionally present itself, but quality films rarely arrive on a programmer’s desk without being vetted at some previous stage by various professionals in the process.
Imagine a Godard script (or lack thereof) being vetted by a lab, then his film being vetted by a sales agent and a distributor before landing on a festival screener’s desk and then a head programmer’s one. There probably would have been no Nouvelle Vague.
And I thought that discovering new talents was one of the programmer’s jobs...
Finding great movies is a festival programmer’s job. If that sometimes involves discovering new talent, so much the better. The only exception would be if you were programming a targeted festival or a sidebar strand specifically devoted to first features and emerging talent.
Godard movies always arrived for consideration by North America festival programmers with distribution or sales agents attached. I wasn’t around for Breathless (1960), but from that moment on, his films had representation because Breathless had been such a defining international hit. His films would not be considered “cold” under the terms of this Stephen Follows analysis.
Why North America? I didn't even think about America since Breathless success came mostly through its Vigo prize and Berlin International Film festival where Godard won the Silver Bear. Granted, it was probably not the best example but not for the reasons you mentioned: simply because it wasn't a cold submission. Back then, festivals had no open submissions.
Plus Godard was very connected and Breathless already had opened in Paris and was a hit with audiences and critics before Berlin. A totally different world where movies could be released *and then* selected at festivals - which, in a way, makes sense.
But it's a good example of how not everything has to be vetted *ahead* of production or festival selection. Godard took a risk to make this movie and only after it was made it was judged by the industry. If it had to go through today’s filters, it probably would not have been made or it would have been so distorted by the endless 'labs' and all the great advices that everybody in this industry is always ready to give to film directors that it would probably have lost what makes it unique. In short, we need de-institutionalization.
PS: thank you for subscribing.
"The fact is most truly cold submissions are really bad, low budget and amateurish." That is a stunning comment and an insult to outsider artists and filmmakers everywhere. So any filmmaker without the 'cultural capital' (as Pierre Bourdieu would call it) to navigate your 'quality filtration system' isn't worth a second look?
I too programmed for 10+ years at a festival (Slamdance) where a large proportion, if not an outright majority, of the competition line-up comes from 'cold' submissions. Some of those films went on to receive critical and commercial success. I won't bore you with a long alumni list but you can start with Christopher Nolan.
Yes, I know you will reply that it's the heroic programmer's job to find these diamonds in the rough and so on... But your initial comment distills the mentality that plagues the A-list festivals. I wish they'd just express that sentiment more openly so outsider filmmakers can stop wasting their money on submission fees.
And this is to say nothing about how A-list festivals are beholden to talent agencies, studios, attorneys, sponsors, and institutions that influence what gets programmed. It's not just a closed system but a system subject to corporate and institutional power.
Honestly, it seems like validation for the quality of the talent ID and support ecosystem.
Thank you so much for doing this work!! I had a suspicion the numbers were like this, but it's so good to have it confirmed. And sooooo helpful for filmmakers who feel crushed by rejection when they submit "cold."
Oh wow, this is so cool to see Gazer here. Thank you, thank you, thank you
Great stuff. It would be interesting to go a step further and look at the accepted "cold" films and determine what percentage of them were directed by white guys.
Beyond that it would be interesting to be able to compare that number to the percentage of "cold" projects submitted by white men, as white men are about 30% of the US population (and apparently they're about 35% of people in Canada), but I can only assume they're still overrepresented in submissions.
I'd love to see these numbers festival by festival, especially in a North American context (Sundance, TIFF, SxSW, Tribecca, etc.), because the sense I have is that the identitarian social justice situation didn't hit the European festivals as hard between 2020 and 2025, but it was clearly playing a huge role in North America (and presumably still is, even if those representing the whole thing aren't being so loud and blatant as they were about it a few years ago). Things also seem to have looked even more skewed in same direction in the context of grants, fellowships, foundations, etc.
https://cinematimshel.substack.com/p/ideologically-out-of-line-and-insufficiently?
Honestly they should all just end open submissions. It would be far more honest and fair. Having open submissions makes people think that’s how it works, and they put their effort and money into the wrong places.
Thank you for this, must have been an immense undertaking to research all of these films. Helpful in so many ways and ultimately confirms the cynical perspective each filmmaker has that there is no hope when you are filmmaker without the right connections. “Thems the breaks!”
Though i’m wondering why a film by Kogonada would be included? Wouldn’t that be a direct contradiction of your criteria given that he’s a successful filmmaker with a track record and all of the connections one can only dream of? Confusing.