- Director
- Writer
- Star
Photos
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Storyline
Featured review
tissues
This is a film created by a guy who is not actually an assumed filmmaker. He likes to try different media, ranging from radio to film, collage to written word. So, one should expect a certain freedom, or detachment from ordinary cinematic codes, that real filmmakers would follow. That's something that makes me wanna try it.
I like what has been tried here. A kind of sensuality, achieved through partial views of the female body. That's probably the very definition of sensuality, and it was taken quite literally here. The fact that this is a short film, and does not obey a linear or full bodied script protects this vision, since there are no actual (female) characters to be developed. The result is that you can imagine anything you'd like, and it will always be more perfect that the actual reality (no matter what that would be) of having faces to match those legs so carefully photographed, half covered by also carefully shot tissues, of different textures and seen with different levels of detail. Skin is tissue, it becomes tissue in many moments.
So the basic idea was good. But i've seen it better done, by this same director. "spittin kiss", which i saw 2 years ago on a big screen, was far more effective, and i think that was because of two things: -the basic story was more tender in kiss, because he centers things on a guy, who incidentally looks for love, in the legs of women passing by. So, he eases on the leg obsession, and that highlights the sensuality. -here he films live action, short shots, sometimes abstract, but real action. In "kiss" what we have is stop motion. Real scenes shot with a photographic camera. Not 24fps, instead bits of reality, which gives us even less to see, and more to imagine. It's an effective trick, which we don't see here, and that cuts the effect, to me.
My opinion: 3/5
http://www.7eyes.wordpress.com
I like what has been tried here. A kind of sensuality, achieved through partial views of the female body. That's probably the very definition of sensuality, and it was taken quite literally here. The fact that this is a short film, and does not obey a linear or full bodied script protects this vision, since there are no actual (female) characters to be developed. The result is that you can imagine anything you'd like, and it will always be more perfect that the actual reality (no matter what that would be) of having faces to match those legs so carefully photographed, half covered by also carefully shot tissues, of different textures and seen with different levels of detail. Skin is tissue, it becomes tissue in many moments.
So the basic idea was good. But i've seen it better done, by this same director. "spittin kiss", which i saw 2 years ago on a big screen, was far more effective, and i think that was because of two things: -the basic story was more tender in kiss, because he centers things on a guy, who incidentally looks for love, in the legs of women passing by. So, he eases on the leg obsession, and that highlights the sensuality. -here he films live action, short shots, sometimes abstract, but real action. In "kiss" what we have is stop motion. Real scenes shot with a photographic camera. Not 24fps, instead bits of reality, which gives us even less to see, and more to imagine. It's an effective trick, which we don't see here, and that cuts the effect, to me.
My opinion: 3/5
http://www.7eyes.wordpress.com
helpful•00
- RResende
- Oct 25, 2009
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime3 minutes
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content