I found the box made the film more appealing than it actually is. The script is interesting if not resembling that of a soap opera.
Despite a hard attempt to watch this film, I eventually ended up discarding it for few reasons; It feels like a long soap opera with static, repetitive shots in over-lit sets (or what look like sets), and it's visually dull. Examples being that the colours often seem saturated and dull, while all possibilities for visually boosting the appeal of the film are ignored - even something as simple as altering the depth of field, which is almost always infinite and again, dull.
The sound is well recorded, crisp and clear but again lacking a certain something.
Above all, this feels very much like a student film: undeveloped, simple and shallow on many accounts. The writing, however, could possibly be the saving grace of the film were to be backed up with equally appealing direction, lighting, sound and editing.
This does appear to be a film made in the youth of the said director's career which could explain why it is how it is.
Despite my negative views, I can say that there are no, or not many errors with boom shadows, editing errors, continuity errors in the shots, narrative or lighting and it's obvious much care has been taken to avoid such issues.
As a film that has been placed in the genre of comedy, I feel it has been misplaced. This is a very performance orientated piece which would sit neatly in the genre of drama or docu-drama along side a short such as 'Tape'. With this possibility in mind, it could still be seen as a comedy from a narrative perspective.
I do feel though, that this film could be very useful in a learning environment as something for beginner to intermediate film students to critique as a piece that's not too complex in an particular way, as something at a quality to aim for when producing their first short.
I hope this is a useful review, and that I haven't overlooked the direction the makers were approaching this project from.
Despite a hard attempt to watch this film, I eventually ended up discarding it for few reasons; It feels like a long soap opera with static, repetitive shots in over-lit sets (or what look like sets), and it's visually dull. Examples being that the colours often seem saturated and dull, while all possibilities for visually boosting the appeal of the film are ignored - even something as simple as altering the depth of field, which is almost always infinite and again, dull.
The sound is well recorded, crisp and clear but again lacking a certain something.
Above all, this feels very much like a student film: undeveloped, simple and shallow on many accounts. The writing, however, could possibly be the saving grace of the film were to be backed up with equally appealing direction, lighting, sound and editing.
This does appear to be a film made in the youth of the said director's career which could explain why it is how it is.
Despite my negative views, I can say that there are no, or not many errors with boom shadows, editing errors, continuity errors in the shots, narrative or lighting and it's obvious much care has been taken to avoid such issues.
As a film that has been placed in the genre of comedy, I feel it has been misplaced. This is a very performance orientated piece which would sit neatly in the genre of drama or docu-drama along side a short such as 'Tape'. With this possibility in mind, it could still be seen as a comedy from a narrative perspective.
I do feel though, that this film could be very useful in a learning environment as something for beginner to intermediate film students to critique as a piece that's not too complex in an particular way, as something at a quality to aim for when producing their first short.
I hope this is a useful review, and that I haven't overlooked the direction the makers were approaching this project from.