Shortcuts Mini Film Festival - Nov05 & Dec05
five films were screened in the latest edition(december) of the ShortCuts Monthly Mini Festival. two of these five films were made by the same film-maker Ajita Suchitraveera: "Notes on her" and "The Solitary Sandpiper." Both the films had extremely good background score and 'The Solitary Sandpiper' was an extravaganza of rich visuals; every shot in the movie looked so beautiful and so captivating that you won't let even a single frame to miss out. it was a treat to watch.
if you can't quite understand the title ".tibbar" then you can try reading it in the reverse direction. that is how the entire film actually runs: in the reverse direction! which means it starts at the end, and ends in the beginning, explaining the rational behind the title. if you think its really an innovative way of shooting a film, then you are not too far off the mark - it has won more awards than you can count on your fingers. it depicts the cruelty with which the rabbits are treated in rabbit breeding farms(not intentionally according to the film maker), which is not too different from what we do here in our poultry farms.
"I couldn't be your son, mom" is a documentary by the famed pair of Budhadeb Dasgupta and Sohini Dasgupta. good documentary. Sachin Kundalkar, on the other hand, has chosen to do the exact oppsite by preferring to make a fictional film instead of the (offered) documentary project, with "The Bath." generally, not many people opt to travel some distance to sit out and watch 4-5 short films on very unusual subjects for close to three hours time. but those who do manage to come, suffer with a bit of superiority complex, with a feeling that they are some kind of 'uber geeks.' well, not all those who come...but some. like the few, who even after being told by Sachin that his film had got no real messages in it, were repeatedly asking questions like "what was the hidden message in so and so," or "what was fish swimming in the acquarium meant to convey to the audience?" or "was there any special meaning behind the conclusion of the film," etc. If you found the questions amusing, then just think about the plight of the film-maker who had already made it very clear that the film has just tried to show a (fictional) day from the life of the main character of the film, and nothing else.
ShortCuts Mini Festival - November Edition
why do i look so angry about it? because the same thing happened with Ajita, and the same thing happened last month with jyoti patil too. four films were screened in the last month's edition of ShortCuts. there was this interesting documentary on bootlegging where the film-maker Jyoti Patil had not just done a very good job with her research(in my opinion), but she also looked to have strived hard to understand the root cause of it all - and succeeded. but most of the distinguished audience in the hall did not just seemed to have failed to pick the real message of the documentary, but they also refused to care for the explanation that jyoti was trying to provide during the talk at the end of the screening. what jyoti was trying to tell was, the liquor that most of the poorest classes of the society produces is termed illegal even while the liquor is allowed to be produced by many other(higher class) sections of the same society - including the government. now, one of the viewers was suggesting that they should try to find an alternative way of earning their livelihood instead of the bootlegging, and was justifying the ban on the liquor production because of health hazards associated with it. whereas what jyoti was trying to say is, when others are allowed to produce the liquor, then why not these poor creatures too? why discrimination? and if it is posing a health hazard for the others, then the correct solution would be to apply the same quality control measures to it that are being applied to the rest of the liquor production. there is no logic in having one set of rules for the higher classes and another for the lower classes. the audiences kept nagging jyoti with questions like "they can sell 'papad' instead, as was shown in the film" etc. i really pitied jyoti at that time.
"The Loser" was a small and beautiful film showing the relationship of a mother and a son with utmost sensitivity. the film touched everyone's hearts, and had a nice concept that was deftly executed.
"In the morning" by Danielle Lurie is about honor killings and is based on a true story. its the truth of the gory practice that strikes you the most. its about the practice of killing someone with the intention of getting back the lost honor of a family. when the daughter of a family is brutally raped by a youngster, the job of 'honor killing' is assigned to the youngest son of that family, so that he can get away with the minimum punishment from the law. it is only at the very end of the film where one discovers that its the daughter who is actually killed in the name of 'honor killing' and not the youngster who had committed the offence in the first place. classic case of punishment being meted out to the victim. its still practiced in many countries all around the world.
the mini festival which was open to all until now, turns subscription based from the next month. details are here
if you can't quite understand the title ".tibbar" then you can try reading it in the reverse direction. that is how the entire film actually runs: in the reverse direction! which means it starts at the end, and ends in the beginning, explaining the rational behind the title. if you think its really an innovative way of shooting a film, then you are not too far off the mark - it has won more awards than you can count on your fingers. it depicts the cruelty with which the rabbits are treated in rabbit breeding farms(not intentionally according to the film maker), which is not too different from what we do here in our poultry farms.
"I couldn't be your son, mom" is a documentary by the famed pair of Budhadeb Dasgupta and Sohini Dasgupta. good documentary. Sachin Kundalkar, on the other hand, has chosen to do the exact oppsite by preferring to make a fictional film instead of the (offered) documentary project, with "The Bath." generally, not many people opt to travel some distance to sit out and watch 4-5 short films on very unusual subjects for close to three hours time. but those who do manage to come, suffer with a bit of superiority complex, with a feeling that they are some kind of 'uber geeks.' well, not all those who come...but some. like the few, who even after being told by Sachin that his film had got no real messages in it, were repeatedly asking questions like "what was the hidden message in so and so," or "what was fish swimming in the acquarium meant to convey to the audience?" or "was there any special meaning behind the conclusion of the film," etc. If you found the questions amusing, then just think about the plight of the film-maker who had already made it very clear that the film has just tried to show a (fictional) day from the life of the main character of the film, and nothing else.
ShortCuts Mini Festival - November Edition
why do i look so angry about it? because the same thing happened with Ajita, and the same thing happened last month with jyoti patil too. four films were screened in the last month's edition of ShortCuts. there was this interesting documentary on bootlegging where the film-maker Jyoti Patil had not just done a very good job with her research(in my opinion), but she also looked to have strived hard to understand the root cause of it all - and succeeded. but most of the distinguished audience in the hall did not just seemed to have failed to pick the real message of the documentary, but they also refused to care for the explanation that jyoti was trying to provide during the talk at the end of the screening. what jyoti was trying to tell was, the liquor that most of the poorest classes of the society produces is termed illegal even while the liquor is allowed to be produced by many other(higher class) sections of the same society - including the government. now, one of the viewers was suggesting that they should try to find an alternative way of earning their livelihood instead of the bootlegging, and was justifying the ban on the liquor production because of health hazards associated with it. whereas what jyoti was trying to say is, when others are allowed to produce the liquor, then why not these poor creatures too? why discrimination? and if it is posing a health hazard for the others, then the correct solution would be to apply the same quality control measures to it that are being applied to the rest of the liquor production. there is no logic in having one set of rules for the higher classes and another for the lower classes. the audiences kept nagging jyoti with questions like "they can sell 'papad' instead, as was shown in the film" etc. i really pitied jyoti at that time.
"The Loser" was a small and beautiful film showing the relationship of a mother and a son with utmost sensitivity. the film touched everyone's hearts, and had a nice concept that was deftly executed.
"In the morning" by Danielle Lurie is about honor killings and is based on a true story. its the truth of the gory practice that strikes you the most. its about the practice of killing someone with the intention of getting back the lost honor of a family. when the daughter of a family is brutally raped by a youngster, the job of 'honor killing' is assigned to the youngest son of that family, so that he can get away with the minimum punishment from the law. it is only at the very end of the film where one discovers that its the daughter who is actually killed in the name of 'honor killing' and not the youngster who had committed the offence in the first place. classic case of punishment being meted out to the victim. its still practiced in many countries all around the world.
the mini festival which was open to all until now, turns subscription based from the next month. details are here
posted by sami at 12/25/2005 01:46:00 PM
<< Home