Empire - Lawrie Brewster - New Age Film

[Norm Sanders]

Sigh ... okay, here goes.

Acting: Poor. They were in near death circumstances, and I never truly felt it in their performances. It felt (and sounded - will get to audio in a moment) like it was filmed in front of a greenscreen in a bare walled room, or a garage. Some of the lines delivered felt as if they were being read at a table reading for the first time. Much of the delivery was very staccato, or wooden.

Composition/Effects: Very poor. IF you were trying for a surreal, dreamlike state, where nothing looks real in the least, then you succeeded quite well. Otherwise, it was a stark contrast to see real people placed within extremely obvious computer animation of soldiers, surroundings, etc ... and it didn't allow me to get into what I was watching at all ... the main reason being because I don't know if you MEAN for it to be like that, of it it's a result of poorly executed effects & composting (poor greenscreen or rotoscoping, etc.).

Audio: Poor. As mentioned, although they were outside in a vast open expanse, I hear the kid's voice echoing as if they're in a small, bare walled room.

Story execution and/or editing: Poor. The logline ended up filling in gaps, and/or telling me more about the story than the actual film did.

But, at the end of the day, all of the above is quite subjective, especially as I don't know if you MEANT for these things to be this way (i.e. audio that doesn't match the setting, staccato delivery of lines, poor CGI, etc. could all be part of a dream like state, or whatever else you intended for this film).

 

[Chris_Keaton]

.....The only thought going through my head as this ended was "What the hell??" ... this was nearly the same thought I had in the beginning, and middle as well.....

I believe that was my response.

Unfortunately my reviews can't really do more than say what I liked or didn't like. Not being a student of film. However, I think Norm really points those things I 'felt', but couldn't describe. I also know Laffie appreciates feedback, honest feedback. Sure the 'I hate artsy fartsy films' feedback is less than helpful, but that's better than hollow praise (not that's he's received any),but you know what I mean.

Now piss off Laffie!

 

[DarkElastic]

As much as I agree with what you put Chris, about being honest in your feedback, I feel Norm's feedback is a hatchet job... The reason I say this is because there is nothing positive, just all negative. Now not everyone will like anything we know that, but most people do try and find something good about it, not Norm...

At least most of the things he found negative (which was pretty much everything) everyone else have been positive towards, so I think Lawrie should take this feedback with a pinch of salt.

 

[lawriejaffa]

Yep no offense Norm, I'm under no dellusions of grandeur but neither am I personally convinced by the full extent of your criticism but thanks for the contribution and you Keaton can kiss my ass hehe - you knooow you love it

 

[Ben Sliker]

Lawrie, here's some thing I think you should take into consideration:

I will add to this (somewhat spammingly hehe)

When you watch a film that is definitive within its story, - laying out its plot clearly, with accessible characters, and with obvious expectations it does so for the purpose of entertainment within that audiences set of expectations.

To be understood comes so obviously that the idea that it should be open to some interpretation is hardly a concern. Neither is this film made as a rubics cube to be worked out, if my prime concern was that someone should 'get it' (such an apt phrased used by dimwitted politicians...) then it would be clear and transparent. Am i trying to be obscure so that i arrogantly expect my audience to decipher some cryptic meaning? No, i am not indulging in some form of intellectual self pleasure... some fans of genre, particularly Americans find it almost offensive to think in relation to the film (its entertainment entertainment entertainment hehe.) (Don't worry the rest of the world has its own foibles with film - namely artistic pretention hehe.)

Not only do I struggle with your logic and run on sentences, but it borders on insulting your audience, that's why I wanted to say a few things about your film and the reaction to it. The reason that people, as they have put it, "don't get" your film, is not because they aren't thinking hard enough, or because you hid your meaning behind the imagery and metaphor; It's because your film makes no sense, and it's pretentious and child-like to say "if i wanted it to make sense, I would have." You blitz your audience with images that could MEAN a number of things and then say that it's not meant to be 'gotten'? There's a number of things that film can achieve: artistic value, pop-corn movie entertainment, heart-felt emotion, etc. and all of these have value. And I wholeheartedly disagree with your first sentence. I, as a director, have zero control with how my audience views my film. I could "lay out my plot clearly, with accessible characters, and obvious expectations with the purpose of entertainment", and it could be ingested in a completely different way. It's as if you're saying an audience can only enjoy a film based on the limitations of it's genre or of their own expectations.

Anyway, the most obvious theme of the film is the horror of war, its perversion we see illustrated by the horrific and bizarre sights that are abound in this landscape of desolation. The idea of man's monstrousity is even specifically mentioned, 'war makes monsters of us all' before metaphorically represented in the guise of the monster... only for us to discover it is the boy's comrade at the very end. Was he chasing the boy to eat him after sparing him the night before? or to save? Had the horrors of war - the cost of its sights driven the boy mad anyway that he should leap to his own death? If these questions pop into your mind, if there is any INTELLECTUAL CURIOUSITY on the part of the viewer - that thinks and discusses within themselves these elements that the film has introduced then it has achieved a more noble purpose than a film that is glossy bs.

If you are not thinking at all and just going MEH, i don't see the 1,2,3's of story, then that says more for the viewer than the film.

So - was my concept a lofty attempt to define war? childhood suffering? Perversions of religion (the crucified woman) - sexual perversions... infancide... madness etc no.

No, for you see i had my own meaning within the film, and i will express this now as an example as to why its so stupid really to say 'i dont get it.'

Art is not there to be got and claimed by the mind.

There are two movies that pop into my head when thinking about what you said here: Platoon and Deer Hunter. Both films that deal with the horror and loss of innocence in war, both best picture winners, both chalk full of metaphor (deer hunter more-so). They are logical, linear, and do a great job relating to the audience, while still carrying an underlying metaphorical message. Now, not to say that this is what your film has to be, but you DO have to consider the audience at one point. If the audience having a shared experience with one of these characters or in dealing with war was important to you, then you should have helped the audience a bit. There are many technical and logistical errors that would throw even the most ardent viewer of your film off the path. For Example, How am I supposed to share the experience of hunger when I can't stop thinking "why are these french guys speaking like scots?" And Frankly, it's every viewer's right to tell you that they didn't get your film, even if you think it's stupid. (And the fact that numerous people have said the same thing should set some alarms off for you, it's your job to figure out WHY this is, or at the least, take note of the reaction.) Art IS there to be got and claimed by the mind, by the individual experience, it's just not there to be defined by one set of rules, so that ANYONE can experience it.

My Meaning
I take the view that life is something of a conflict in itself, a challenge and at times a very traumatising experience. I remember a friend of mine Richard, who many years ago climbed a large hill with a steep rock face in the midst of winter. Depressed and alone in the conflict of his own life, he leapt to his own death, he was like perhaps all of us, children in this world - more frightened that we realise. Despite my friendship and others he leapt. There was no saving him - and there is no saving of the boy from the trauma's he has encountered in Empire. In actual fact my first (and not this) film was dedicated to him

Empire the dominion of man... yet more frail than we realise eh gentlemen?

Would you Brandon have ever got that? Do you honestly think it was my intention that you should? Of course not. Yet that was the internal meaning to me, expressed through 'metaphor.'

Art is there to be experienced not understood.

Remember that phrase, and consider that any story you watch that is delightfully obvious, serves its purpose also, but that it is the insignificant tip of the artistic iceberg. If that sounds a little arrogant, I'm not the type to apolagise for it

So, if I'm to be bold enough to say this, to 'get' your film would be to know of your experience with your friend. The shared experience of that emotion is the important part. You are right, we'd never be able to get the inner meaning of this film to you, but you can share that emotion with the audience instead of hiding it away in incomprehensible metaphor. And then you end with a statement that can't be argued, which might i add, is the ultimate cop out. "Art is there to be experienced not understood." well ... no shi*. But there are a ton of ways that you could have structured your film so that it was a piece of art AND more relatable to the audience that was watching it.

I, nonetheless, am deeply intrigued to hear your response.

 

[Gord.T]

Hey Lawrie, I have to conclude this is truly a work of art of my highest order. Regardless of what anyone else thinks, I do have my own opinion mind you, I think while your short fails in several technical areas such as balancing sound, lighting and other issues that would be very important to mainstream media, I think, honsestly, one can become too obsessive and get lost in the artistic aspect. European art films imo are quite different than North American art films.

I think on one hand the harsh crits are justified, technically, but at the same time I don't think they see the artistic aspect of your short. I find it outstanding creatively and regard this short as quite inspiring.

In particular I think it will fare better in the European side of the world. Much like the Japanese and German films.

In short, I dont think you will place well in this particular fest, but this is very impressive as an artistic statement, as a writer and director and as an artist. The soul, art and genious is there in you. Maybe a few technical adjustments filming and it might sway the other non-sayers. Unfortunatly sometimes art has to take a back seat. That is the nature of art anyways, is it not? Anyways...

I'm very very impressed Lawrie. Submit to the UK fests after this one and keep me updated.
-Cheers.

 

[lawriejaffa]

Righto we have some wonderfully interesting points to discuss and i heartily thank you for bringing some up Ben I hope to do the same soon on my video feedback for your film too

I think we have a bit of a misunderstanding here though, if i can quote here...

Not only do I struggle with your logic and run on sentences, but it borders on insulting your audience, that's why I wanted to say a few things about your film and the reaction to it. The reason that people, as they have put it, "don't get" your film, is not because they aren't thinking hard enough, or because you hid your meaning behind the imagery and metaphor; It's because your film makes no sense, and it's pretentious and child-like to say "if i wanted it to make sense, I would have."

Your being a little presumptive here Ben, the reason that people, as they have put it don't get your film... it seems a little naughtily that your making that out to be a majority. If anything im delighted how accessible this film has been and the positive response to it. I have absolutely no defensive attitude about some kind of worthy artistic value to this film. It is relative to each viewer to decide that and i have no expectation.

I find that any criticism summised as not getting it, to be simplistic and i encouraged and challenged for those who did say... a minority Ben to articulate why? I encouraged Brandon, Keaton and you know what? I would do it if they said it about your film too mate? Or anyone elses... of if i heard someone say something like that in an Art Gallery about a sculpture or painting... scary huh.

So while im sure your macho critique of 'its because your film makes no sense' sounds good (almost paraphrased from some kind of self-motivational guidebook) it bears no meaning here. The truth is, that the film - ANY FILM, will be interpretated differently by an audience member, only a personal reaction to it will make one want to declare that it makes no sense whatsoever.

Hence i like to get to the truth of such a response. Disagree with that if you like, but do not presume its because i pretentiously desire to make an obvious story obtuse... just so i can delight at how complicated it is... only to get all child like hehe and upset because not everyone gets what i intended lol.

I made a film to be experienced, and understood by audience members on their own terms, not on mine. I hope that clarifies Ben, and i dont take offence at your mischaracterisation of my attitude.

You blitz your audience with images that could MEAN a number of things and then say that it's not meant to be 'gotten'?

The images i chose are an expression of something i felt, and in doing so i structured it in a way i feel actually works. You seem preoccupied with being 'gotten' again, ive said that it is only that form of criticism and its lack of articulation (because i dont personally believe anyone sayign that means that... there instead saying i dont like the film but not saying why hehe...) because we do interpret meanings anyway... you've heard of Rorschach tests right? (yah don't worry its a joke) So again *breathes deep* its not about people getting it and definately not about me trying to make people get it... there is no 'getting anything' for any film - full stop. Art is subjective.

I as a director, have zero control with how my audience views my film. I could "lay out my plot clearly, with accessible characters, and obvious expectations with the purpose of entertainment", and it could be ingested in a completely different way. It's as if you're saying an audience can only enjoy a film based on the limitations of it's genre or of their own expectations.

Im not quite sure where you get that from regarding my point of view. Your quoting of me joking about Americans for entertainment and Europeans for over the top arthouse was a tease. But regarding your point of view, I think a filmmaker indeed has little (i wouldnt say zero!) control over how an audience views there film. I should add though as a producer, (and a few i know think like this....) that target audiences do have expectations of films that could be characterised as the limitations of its genre... (hence their expectations for that genre) and that limiting a commercial genre films creativity as a result... but meh... i see plenty of wonderful creative genre films. So this is moot really.

but you DO have to consider the audience at one point.

Yep I do consider the audience, most feedback here has been positive, i would have been satisfied with just ONE positive feedback? Do you understand Ben, the film would have still worked for me as an artist.

How am I supposed to share the experience of hunger when I can't stop thinking "why are these french guys speaking like scots?" And Frankly, it's every viewer's right to tell you that they didn't get your film, even if you think it's stupid. (And the fact that numerous people have said the same thing should set some alarms off for you.

Ben i think you are getting a little carried away, and as a competitor in the festival i think your being a little cheeky to suggest that 'numerous' people, an overwhelming tide in fact... are citing such warnings that alarm bells should be ringing hehe. They are not. I appreciate intelligent criticism, i also appreciate that my personality is not one that everybody might like. That i might seem abrasive and that it contributes to people getting a little personal in their criticism too.

But thats okay Keeps my black heart warm in the night teehee next to Zaza's...

Art IS there to be got and claimed by the mind, by the individual experience, it's just not there to be defined by one set of rules, so that ANYONE can experience it.

Is it? Says who Ben? You... this is tripe popularism. Art is not there to be defined by one set of rules... thats like saying... my choice of breakfast cereal is not there to be defined by one set of rules... anyone should enjoy my cereal hehe.

Hey on the opposite scale it pretty much sucks to make art inaccessible, but jeez Ben Your not running for president hehe. We can agree to disagree about art - i don't see it as something to be be tamed, if its understood it is so subjectively by the intense personal experience of the individual. (So you see we do share i think the general sentiment despite our differences.)

So, if I'm to be bold enough to say this, to 'get' your film would be to know of your experience with your friend.

I LOVE BOLDNESS. Honestly - I adore it... life's too short for anyone not to be.

Of course Ben that is absolutely not the case that i wanted people to get that particular experience literally its called a metaphor hehe. (Joooking mate.) My point in bringing that up was to actually highlight how futile it is in many cases for an artist to take the inspiration for their idea, and make that a point to be 'gotten'. So hope that clarifies that even the inspiration that binds a story with hidden meaning, does not need to be expressed for that story to hold a relevant meaning - an individual meaning for an audience member receptive to it.

we'd never be able to get the inner meaning of this film to you, but you can share that emotion with the audience instead of hiding it away in incomprehensible metaphor.

Aha... but you must recall i joked numerous times... that if it was about getting a specific inner meaning - that it would be ridiculous to hide it in incomprehensible metaphor. So for most there is a meaning - interpretated individually and those visual metaphors lend to that - with a general impression i hoped to paint. My visual choices were no different to a painters choice of colours. An artist painting a landscape doesn't call his picture of a sunny field 'have a nice day' hehe (You shoud tell him too

"Art is there to be experienced not understood." well ... no shi*.

Well im glad you've come to my point of view hehe

But there are a ton of ways that you could have structured your film so that it was a piece of art AND more relatable to the audience that was watching it.

Yeah but don't presume to speak for the audience Ben, when i offer your film feedback will i speak in such naughty platitudes as to suggest wide shared criticisms of what i think is weak in your film? Would that be appropriate No... you have your point of view... just your own my friend and likewise mine will be my own too

So hope that response helps, and actually clarifies that we do agree on many points, and that you have maybe misunderstood my position (and i have probably been confusing in expressing it) on some other areas. Thanks for the contribution mon amie! honest thanks - I hope you realised i had to click that quote button far too many times to discuss these points.

I like discussion, but lets also not go in circles gents and lets keep things nice and friendly Ben if you want to respond lets maybe summarise a little our points (less epic) or even PM discuss to keep things light and jolly (you know... crucifictions, infancide... genocide... all the cheery subject matter of the film hehe.)

 

[lawriejaffa]

Raptor - as you know from the 3d section of the forum i have always appreciated your help, and your advice. I can't express how delighted i am to have impressed you whose work i admire very much myself. Obviously im not the kinda guy to win any popularity contests muahaahah (im a bastard but zaza will still make love to me when he's drunk hehe) but i do hope the fest audience enjoys the film - not because of any perceived lofty aim - it doesnt! Its there to cause nightmares in vulnerable adults muhahahah.

This 'getting it' has come about because i have asked those few who have said it to say what they didnt like about the movie, not because i was suggesting there was some amazing message to be gleaned from it lol. Its enough that most seem to have at least enjoyed it thus far!

Regarding the technical elements especially the sound mix, i'll be working on that, and deffo ill consider entering it for other fests when completed. But this film is made specifically for Quest Fest and i hope that it brings something different to the table - and im delighted, SO HAPPY in fact that it appears to have found an audience here! From the Lawsuit Boys to the Champloos lol

 

[Ben Sliker]

Lawrie,

I'll respond, but only cause you called me macho.

I tried to make my post void of any qualitative analysis, I just frankly wasn't too thrilled with the manner in which you went about asking for a critique. Personally, I could care less if people 'get' your film, because it's not really a film to be "got", it's about emotion and feelings. I feel as though some of the technical shortcomings (or perhaps even some of the narrative aspects) of your film could get in the way of this for the viewer. So, I wouldn't discredit any number of people not 'getting' your film, (even if it's one or two) it may be more than an inability to articulate their thoughts as well as you do, and in this case, a valid critique. Asking them to clarify is also valid, but I doubt you'll get any responses by telling them that their thoughts are stupid and that it reflects on them instead of your film.

I kind of agree that we are swapping generalist statements about what art means to different people, so i'll stop right there on that.

I'm sorry you got caught up in thinking that I was saying that NO ONE 'got' your film, perhaps it was a loose use of pronouns on my part, but in the end, I do speak for the audience Lawire, cause I AM your audience.

then again ... opinion are like assholes. he he.

I like discussion, but lets also not go in circles gents and lets keep things nice and friendly Ben if you want to respond lets maybe summarise a little our points (less epic) or even PM discuss to keep things light and jolly (you know... crucifictions, infancide... genocide... all the cheery subject matter of the film hehe.)

lol ... you just asked to not have epic posts on your thread. agreed, discourse in general is good.

 

[Chris_Keaton]

Yep no offense Norm, I'm under no dellusions of grandeur but neither am I personally convinced by the full extent of your criticism but thanks for the contribution and you Keaton can kiss my ass hehe - you knooow you love it

Hey, look I stared in the short didn't I? But I mean after yelling on that mountain top all day you could've at least given me some hot chocolate.

 

[Neil Rowe]

K, i dont want to paint a target on my head or anything so ill just start by saying that the following is mereley my humble opinion as a fellow filmmaker and artist, and i make no assertations that anyone else should or does agree.

..now , having said that. ..permission to speak freely?!

..this film was weird.. entertaining.. but, and perhaps only because it was so weird. I couldnt make out any real definite storyline, and as a mod i was left thinking "how on earth did this pass as a quest through the script greenlight?" .. please dont answer that... seriously though.. you could say anything because its all artistic interpretation, but what i read you saying is that its a film about the horrors of war. .ok. ..how is the horror of war a quest. it should have been a film about a clear and defined quest. ..anyway again.. please .. seriously, dont answer. understand that i asked the same question very same question with many of the other films as well. anyway.. back to the film. .it was entertaining.. almost spellbinding because i didnt know what on earth was going on. and the effects .. although yeah there not the best in the world, i found very interesting and intriguing as they were .. sort of like toy soldiers in this yeti playground with dead babies underfoot. in the end i was like "what the bloody hell was that?" .. but i didnt actually really care becuase it was simply more entertaining than alot of the others. all in all i thought you did a good job on this peice. i actually watched it all the way through, and even watched a couple things more than once. just to check out what was happening and see if i could make sense of it or look at the effects closer. so.. weird weird peice. but very interesting. definitely one i.. and i assume others will remember from the fest which is few and far between, so that has to count for something. ..although just a suggestion, but as a curious fan id suggest a little more ear and a little less back of the hand for your audience. .. cause they will rember you yourself as well.

 

[Norm Sanders]

I feel Norm's feedback is a hatchet job... The reason I say this is because there is nothing positive, just all negative. Now not everyone will like anything we know that, but most people do try and find something good about it, not Norm...

At least most of the things he found negative (which was pretty much everything) everyone else have been positive towards, so I think Lawrie should take this feedback with a pinch of salt.

You're right ... here's a positive. He finished the film, and got it entered into the fest. Something MANY others were not able to accomplish, and I didn't even TRY to enter this fest, so he's one up'd many of folks. Honestly, that's something to point out as a positive, and I'm sorry I didn't do it sooner.

Other than that, I didn't find anything else worth praising, to my tastes, so why pump up something out of nothing, if I didn't find a positive?

 

[lawriejaffa]

Hey Ben hehe thanks for posting again mate - good well i think we've arrived at the same place more or less much respect my friend Now I hope you realise that - we can disagree or agree, (i think we've actually helped translate... rather than debate.) But I have a lot of respect for you and your films despite our differences in style and objective. Something you will find reflected positively in my feedback. Till then don't go buying Maya Deren a Syd Field book for Christmas ok hehe?

But not for you KEATING!!!! I will never respect you!!! *falls on knees* KHAAAAN and KEAAAATON!!!! hehehe the only hot chcocolate you'll be getting is one served in a prison shower room with Puck (I don't know if your up for that Puck but hehe - you know i love ya Keating

Yep wise words Neil and thanks for the feedback - honestly i dont take any particular exception to your questioning the quest theme - i had that response to the winner of Lossfest myself! The approved quest idea was the odyssay of these characters trying to return home. I respect the time you took there to provide feedback and discussion, i'm certainly listening and im a fan of RowE Cine too so even better Thank you mon amie. Oh yeah and i know i'm fiesty hehe (especially in the mornings ooh er!)

In general gents the film succeeds to me if it gets some good feedback for what its attempting to do, and i'm pelased if it can provoke intelligent discussion. There is a fundamental difference between a film like this and say a straight story like Ben's for example, where understanding literal elements is essential for (in your case imo Ben) for the cathartic emotional pay off etc.

Most of all though its the friendly and constructive feedback i appreciate that leads to the improvement of the film, and while atm i fear my video feedback may be demoted to audio feedback (due to a very important short im producing with a young lady mioweeee) i hope to be helpful and positive too (even with a wink of humour.)

 

[Chris_Keaton]

... "how on earth did this pass as a quest through the script greenlight?" .. please dont answer that... seriously though.. you could say anything because its all artistic interpretation, but what i read you saying is that its a film about the horrors of war. .ok. ..how is the horror of war a quest. it should have been a film about a clear and defined quest. ..anyway again.. please .. seriously, dont answer. understand that i asked the same question very same question with many of the other films as well. anyway.....

Look most films are quests. The protag is on a quest for something, even if it is just a glass of water. For example the three films I contributed two.

- The Office Survivor Guy - The guy is trying to survival in an gym jungle, sure it's situation he put himself in, but that's his quest.

- Medal of Merit - Kid has to save his friend.

- Do Not Disturb - Guy fights for a good night's sleep. In the previous two examples the protag's succeeded in their goals. In this one the protag fails the worst way possible, but continues the struggle.

So in Lawrie's film I'm sure there's a quest, it may be internal, it may be existential, but it's there.

 

[Neil Rowe]

bah.. see. now youve gone and opened that can of worms. ok. let me just spit some real world juice for a second ..as i said anyone can say anything because at some level or another they can point to some form of a goal that the main charachter(s) has at some point in the film. but bottom line is when the theme itself is "questfest" and its made clear that the entire film be about the quest itself. it shouldnt be somethign that anyone has to point out. it should be clear and present from the beginning to the end. not incidental, not exsitential, not circumstancial, not starting in the middle or end of the film.. but a film about a clear quest that the chrachter sets out on and follows throughout the film. the film should be entirely about the quest itself. not a film about something else with some shape or form of a quest woven into it somewhere. because that leaves us with zero reasons to have had a "questfest" in the first place. my personal opinion is that alot of people simply hacked through the approval process, and said the film would be about one thing, and then really made a film about something else while pointing to some subplot, ideology, or undertone to get the project greenlighted as having some form of a quest in it. either that or they completely missed the idea of what a quest film shold be like. no specific genre. no specific storyline. just what a quest is in the first place. ..anyway. again. im not searching to DQ anyones film. or stir up issues. im just saying that as a viewer when i sit down to watch a bunch of quest films i expect a bunch of quest films. variations and creativity shouldnt come in the way shape or form of how someone decides to interpret what a quest is in the first place. it should come in terms of what the quest is about.

..think zombie fest. it would be far more obvious as to a film embracing the required theme or not if someone made a musical about helping out your local bakery by buying more bread with zero zombies or zombie related material and then just said "well. they are zombies because all they know how to do is sing.. yeah.. they are singing zombies.. thats the way i see it" ..the issue here is that the theme isnt a genre which is far easier to grasp. but its a story architechture that weve asked to be embraced, since theres no clear or defining visual or audible markers to story writing that can be defined in the final film, people seemed to not quite wrap thier heads around how to really fit their films into the requirements.. or perhaps they simply found ways to skirt it, as they knew how to get greenlit, ..but somehow failed to make the greenlit storyline the focus of the actual film. aaaaanyway. its been an interesting excersise to try and help people improve thier storytelling through a real theme based screenwriting excersise intended to force people to think within the constructs of writing a compelling and focused narrative. ..and for the most part id give it an F as an excersise in terms of focused results, but hopefully we can learn from it and come up with some other way to help gently nudge participants to really dig deeper into the craft then simply exhibiting thier ideas when they go through this process of the fest. therse of course some that really embraced the theme, but some.. should be ALL.

 

[lawriejaffa]

Hey Neil its okay mate you don't have to qualify your opinion on it. To me the quest theme is fairly obvious... the quest to go home and survive. Nothing mysterious about it - the kid says i 'i order you to take me home' to his comrades. That is what they attempt to do? Bar the surreal visuals its not really that abstract (the film) - i mean this is where Lawsuit Boy would be handy hehe he's the master of arthouse interpretation i think (im basing this on your uber reviews good sir) is this film really so metaphysical hehe.

Its futile and a bit silly to really question the films closeness to the theme as the point of the approval process is really to make this moot. Incidentally I haven't had a storm of folk going omg this is not a quest related film wtf etc you know so fair enough but again, hardly pressing.

Do Not Disturb is a good example of valid abstraction of the quest theme - a chap tries to get sleep against the odds - this becomes a quest. Not so obviously apparent that if you showed it to the guy in the street he was say - wow this is a film all about a quest... but its Conan the Barbarion compared to what the winning film of Lossfest was to the theme of loss...

For the record though Neil I compeltely agree with the principle (though we may differ with this particular film) that the movies should follow the theme of the festival. That is the challenge for the filmmaker and its annoying if folk just abuse the fest theme to stick any idea in. That is why i completely welcome the new festival rules for appoval of synopsis and film review. It makes it fair, but we should respect that process and not make criticism of films validity in the competition a part of our criticism.

 

[lawriejaffa]

Some new stills!!!

 

[lawriejaffa]

More to come if you chaps would like im happy to post the storyboard and script too?

 

[Zak Forsman]

there are so many ways to navigate our own biases and mold our opinions on how to have approached this theme that I have a hard time accepting any matter-of-fact statement on what the ideal "questfest" film is. one could easily look at the dictionary definition of a quest: "a long and arduous journey" and conclude that this film depicted that to a greater degree than any other in this fest.

and yet, you have something like "Meeting", where the plot wasn't a depiction of the quest at all. Perhaps we saw the conclusion of the quest, we saw the protag's rewards from achieving it and the love-sacrifice he made. Instead of a film about the journey itself, it was a penetrating glimpse at the ramifications of a successful quest for corporate success. knowing the filmmaker's recent personal loss was enough context that I became a bit emotional seeing that woman behind plate-glass, so close but impossible to touch.

personally, the last thing I want to be told... and it's a real pet peeve of mine... is what film or filmmaking is supposed to be. you can speak to successes and failures in execution of intent. you can speak to personal taste in subject matter and aesthetics. that's fine. but please don't presume to know the boundaries where great filmmaking will lie. that's impossible.

 

[lawriejaffa]

Yep Zak i had a similar experience watching Kyrre's Meeting, that man hehe and you too, are sophisticated masters of evoking deeper emotional experiences that transcend cliche'd soap opera theatrics, while remaining relevant to the festival themes in my own humble enough opinion.

Where-ever Empire polls in this competition, it will have polled one position higher for the simple fact that Meeting is an exhibition only entry... but be that as it may, Meeting is already a winner in my book.