It reassures me that myself and the others in my group are, in fact, bloody good film makers. If this can be one of the 11 winners of the Independent Lens Online Shorts Festival, then surely our film - whatever it may be - will be capable of walking away with the grand prize.
The opening is not too bad. It begins with a shot of the outside of a dry cleaners', with a bored worker slumped over the work-top reading. Even the acting seems OK to begin with.
After a brief conversation with the blood-spattered couple, the film jumps to a documentary-section, which is the part I enjoyed the most. If the entire film had gone down this route, then I might have had some more complimentary things to say about it. Unfortunately, this section is a one-off, and bears absolutely no significance to the rest of the action whatsoever. In my opinion, it does not work to break up a film of naturalistic style with a section of documentary and then not bring it back later on as a recurring theme - is the protagonist aware of us as an audience or not? J. P. Chan cannot seem to make up his mind.
As the film progresses, the acting becomes more and more abysmal, and the pauses between dialogue become longer and more unnecessary.
This film is described by its makers as a "comedy". The documentary section is certainly comical ("Is there a way to get rid of the stains but keep the smell...?"), but the rest is simply uncomfortable and contains no humour at all.
The camera-work also left a lot to be desired. It was overexposed in most places, and tops of heads were constantly cut off. I am overcome with a desire to buy the cameraman a tripod for his birthday.
This is a perfect example of a film that takes itself much to seriously. The script in the second half tries to be deep and meaningful, and fails. The random black-and-white shots try to give an artistic aspect to the film, and fail. I don't understand the significance of the ending at all. I don't know how to put this any other way: I don't get it.
No comments:
Post a Comment