Lomography and SINdie co-present a new filmmaking challenge – Shoot your own Lomokino Movie!
Just in case you don't already know. The Lomokino a real film camera that with give Lomography enthusiasts another reason to get busy. Filmmaking buffs will also love its rich visuals and analog feel. Check out our previous posting on the camera and what it can do!
How to take part in the contest and win the LomoKino:
1. Think of a 3 min film you would make with a Lomokino.
2. Send us a photo and an accompanying line of text what your Lomokino film will be about.
3. Send it to promotion.sg@lomography.com
4. The best 10 entries will be loaned a LomoKino to produce their film.
5. The films will be screened at a Lomography x SINdie film workshop at Lomography Gallery Store where the best 2 will be picked at a live judging to win a Lomokino they can keep forever!
Deadline for entries: 11 Dec, Sunday
Lomography will provide guidance to the 10 finalists on using the camera to shoot their films.
Prizes
1st Prize: LomoKino + 3 packs of film. He/she will also get to be a Lomo Amigo. 2nd Prize: LomoKino 8 Runner up Prizes: Lomography button badge set + 10 Piggies (store credit in our online store; 1 Piggy = 1 USD)
For more information on the Lomokino, check out the following links:
http://microsites.lomography.com/lomokino/
http://asia.shop.lomography.com/lomokino
How lucky are you, or are you not? That's the question Red Numbers asks. The story revolves around a guy who, according to a fengshui master, only three lucky minutes in his miserable life. His fortune is wrapped up with a greedy family whose grandfather holds the key to the winning combination in the 4D lottery. Three minutes, four numbers, a lot of money - or maybe not.
Red Numbers was originally conceived by director, Dom Ow based on conversations with bookies about Ang Zi (Hokkien for red numbers) or popular betting numbers. It was re-written by writer-producer Koh Teng Liang in early 2011. Shot in April/May 2011, Red Numbers features an eclectic and exciting ensemble cast comprising Singapore TV veterans such as Chen Su Cheng, Hong Hui Fang and Edmund Chen, up and coming stage and screen talents, a real fengshui master, and a first-time actor who scored a major role on his first ever audition. Photographed, production designed and coloured in the style of magical realism, Red Numbers hopes to be a very different Singapore film, with a little bit of luck.
We speak with Dom and find out why the former army regular took the big step to become a filmmaker.
Tell us about the experience of switching from an lieutenant colonel to a filmmaker. What inspired the change in industry?
I have always loved films and filmmaking. I made my first sync-sound slide show when I was 14 (sigh yes…I’m that old). I remember desperately trying to control my bladder until the intermission when I saw Ghandi at the movie theatre. Practical concerns took over when I grew up and I signed on in the military but not before I had a great education where I majored in film. After spending more than decade as a soldier, I felt it was time to pursue the dream I had as a kid or lose it forever. So I took that big step…
Does the label of a “first time feature filmmaker” bother you? How so?
Not at all. First of all, it’s factually correct. Second, every film director who’s credible or significant had to make his or her first feature. And thirdly, the label actually affords you some advantages. I think the cast and crew seemed that little bit more patient with me when they knew it was my first feature.
How much do you believe in the concept of feng shui and luck? How has it shaped your life?
I believe there is a force bigger than all of us that influences our lives and our world. To some that may be God, to others fengshui, but in the end, we might all say, “some things were meant to happen.” I also believe that there is a balance and harmony in life and in the environment. Some people say that it’s fengshui to place objects in a certain way or to create buildings a certain way. I guess some other people would just call it good taste.
What were the easiest and most challenging aspects of making this film? Were there any memorable experiences that you’d like to share?
Easy? There are no easy aspects of making a film. A film production is a recipe for disaster and it’s really a modern day miracle that films actually get made. I think for me, what was particularly challenging was working with a large ensemble cast, none of whom I had worked with before, and trying to appreciate very quickly, their strengths, weaknesses, motivations and quirks so that I could create the right environment for them to perform.
How was it like working with veteran actors like Chen Shu Cheng, Hong Huifang and Edmund Chen? How would you rate their performances?
I have nothing but respect for the veteran actors like Sucheng, Huifang and Edmund. First of all, it’s not easy being an actor, to put yourself out there to be judged all the time. But I think what I admired most about them were the professional values they brought to the set day in day out. They were always on time, knew their lines, studied their characters, had their energy levels up, and were ready with constructive suggestions to improve theirs and everyone else’s performances. If their performances were anything less than top notch, audiences can put it down to my direction.
On the other end, you are also working with a first-time actor. What was the experience like working with him?
Rubing was a first-time actor but he was a natural. There are some things you can learn in acting school or through experience: diction, hitting your marks, cheating for the camera, adapting to direction. He had none of these skills so he had to pick them up quickly or we would all have had a heart attack (or killed him) by the end of day 2. But when I say he was a natural, I mean that he had such a relaxed composure in front of the camera. He didn’t have to psych himself up to perform. After he got over the jitters of the first day, he simply walked on and became the character.
How is this film different from the many other local productions out there?
I think many local productions try to tell realistic, gritty tales or they (especially the ghost stories) are filmed in a realistic, gritty way. Red Numbers, I feel, is “unreal”. The story is a crazy caper and the film is shot, production designed and coloured in the style of magical realism. You won’t be coming away from this movie saying, “Ah, this looks exactly like my life,” or “That’s what happened to me today!”
What do you hope viewers take away after the end credits roll?
I think many viewers, particularly Singaporeans, take their 4D gambling very seriously. Without giving too much of the story away, I hope they can walk away, have a laugh at themselves, and not take their punting so seriously.
Why do you think this film is worthy of more people’s attention?
As much as this film is styled in magical realism, I think it reflects the interesting contrasts of Singapore today. Here I am, essentially an English-educated guy making a Mandarin feature. We have a very educated population whose students win the Math Olympiad but whose gamblers also believe that some 4D numbers have a greater probability of winning than others. We have scenes of the modern iconic Flyer but also icons of the past like the Bukit Brown cemetery and Rochor Centre. We have Chinese characters who don’t speak Mandarin and Chinese characters who can’t speak any dialects on screen or off. I think if you took a step back after watching Red Numbers, you just might find yourself saying, this is a little strange, but it is Singapore.
After a number of grueling months making this film, do you foresee yourself making more films? What’s in store next?
I definitely see myself making more films. From the perspective of survival, every first-time feature filmmaker must try to be good enough so they can get a second shot. There are few Tarantinos in the real world. If Malcolm Gladwell believes 10,000 hours is what it takes to become an expert, then that is what every starting filmmaker must appreciate the journey entails. I hope audiences see enough merit in Red Numbers to let me make my second feature. In the meantime, I’m busy making the second season of Every Singaporean Son. Ah…documentary work, that’s another interview altogether…
SinemaTV is an alternative YouTube channel started by the folkd at Sinema and they feature a range of videos that cover a spectrum of topics across film, art, lifestyle, fashion, music and even ghosts! They are 'Exclusively Singaporean. Strictly alternative.', as their tagline says. SINdie pays them a visit at the soon-to-be-demolished Old School where they produce all their glossy, thoughtful videos.
If you have something you want to see on TV, tell them. SinemaTV is interested to create content that you (yes you!) want to watch. SinemaTVSG has no official website just yet but do follow them on Twitter @sinematvsg !
The much awaited Gala Premiere of Already Famous was held yesterday, 22 November at The Cathay. Level 5 of The Cathay was packed with eager fans who were waiting for their idols’ stage appearance. First up on stage were the cameos, Nat Ho, Li Teng, Ho Ailing, Cynthia Koh (who plays an auntie!) and Patricia Mok who shared their experiences working with Michelle on the film Already Famous. Then the male lead, Alien Huang and female lead/director/scriptwriter Michelle Chong made their appearance on stage to greet their fans before going around to 8 halls to greet the guests who were invited to Already Famous gala premiere.
The cameo cast of Nat Ho, Li Teng, Ho Ailing, Cynthia Koh (who plays an auntie) and Patricia Mok
The cast revealed their dirty on-set secrets
Welcoming an 'Alien' in numbers
The dress theme for the evening was Charlie Chaplin's 'Hard Times'
Michelle has her share of male fan too
Charles Dickens would be proud
Michelle, woman of many hats, looks for a moment 'a little getai' here with her bouquet and her hat-obsessed duet partner
It was something just waiting to happen, wasn’t it? All those years reading chapter after chapter about haunted army camps in Russell Lee’s “True Singapore Ghost Stories”, all those nights listening to supernatural tales narrated by friends who have enlisted in the armed forces before us, all those moments scaring ourselves silly during guard duty shifts – it all led to this. A feature film about an army ghost story which boys (who have since become men) can identify with.
So it’s only natural that this columnist is curious to find out whether writer-director Gilbert Chan’s debut feature film will send chills down his spine. After all, this self-declared fearless mortal did his part of serving the nation more than 10 years ago. This just means that he did his national service on a five-and-a-half-day week, and beat this – lower allowance. Most importantly, he had slept in one of those run-down bunkers which can easily let your imagination run amok.
Chan’s script tells the story of a group of army recruits staying on an island which is supposedly haunted by an insane woman who died at 23:59. A cowardly soldier claims that the spirit has been visiting him every night. The next thing his fellow recruits know, he is found dead after a route march. Strange things continue happening, and the soldiers’ worst fears come true.
Conceptually, this story does have a lot of potential to scare the hell out of local audiences (especially those who have served their national service offshore). Who isn’t afraid of that strange old lady who appears at the door every time you open your eyes in the middle of the night? Who isn’t freaked out by that strange noise emitting from the bushes whenever you patrol the camp with your buddy? And aren’t you damn sure that there is a pair of eyes watching over you as you leopard crawl through the twigs and branches?
Rated PG13 for horror theme and disturbing scenes, this movie won’t be the scariest picture you would see. Chan tries a little too hard to set up the frights, and although there are a few effective shocks, they are few and far between. Besides the fact these moments come across as cheap scares, what you’d get from a large part of the 78-minute production are soldiers looking disturbed, frightened and anxious.
Headlined by local comedian Mark Lee who does his best to inject some light-hearted moments in the otherwise dreary movie, the decently-produced flick also stars Malaysian stars Henley Hii and Josh Lai. The two good-lookers are convincing as army boys (it’s amazing what a shaved head can do to your acting), but the show is stolen by, err, a badly deformed girl who creeps out from the corner to shock the hell out of unknowing audiences.
That said, marks go the makeup team for creating such a hideous creature. Also, the production values of this averagely-rated movie aren’t too bad. From location scouting and art direction to cinematography and sound design, the team deserves commendation. Maybe it’s just a case of this demanding (and ahem, fearless) columnist who does not know (yet!) the true meaning of fear.
Here's a creepy theatrical trailer to whet your appetite:
A sequel is in the works, and if you have any ghostly experiences to share, write to: 2359_sequel@cloverfilms.com.sg, and you may see your nightmares translated on screen!
Many people 'took away' with them the clowns walking out of One Sunny Morning, BK Lim's award winning short film. It defies narrative logic and realism and creates an obvious mental node for the audience. For fans of art-house cinema, they will find the visual a familiar reference. In Michaelangelo Antonioni's iconic Blow Up. a troupe of mime actors perched on a moving lorry arrive at a tennis court and start creating a surreal pandemonium. In One Sunny Morning, a troupe of clown with similar mime make-up hijack protagonist Juan route to work, blurring the lines between realism and expressionism. Quite aptly, BK was quick in defending his off-tangent stroke and seeming act of plagiarism as a tribute to the arthouse films he's been a huge fan of. The stroke hits half the time and misses the other half the time, feeling like strange transplant.
For me, the film resonated on a different frequency. For a first time effort, the actors slid snugly into their well crafted roles. There is Juan, the married man who takes a step off his conventional path and take a chance with a fresh, young, hot-blooded stud he met at the swimming pool. Likewise, Nick, the young stallion at the pool wanders off the muscle-fraternity into mature territory with Juan. Sounds like an HIV prevention ad? Well, kind of, only this one digs deeper into the characters. Indeed, the conversation that follows in the morning after reflects the seasoned eyes of someone who's seen through the traps of relationships. It is intense, yet not psychotically so. Nick is as unsure as much as he is feeling the loss of Juan. Yet, somewhere in between dilemma and loss was room for some humour that lifted the characters beyond being the token halves of a break-up scene.
The film appeared to be a tight and rather successful collaboration between the 2 leads and the director. Keagan Kang and Nicholas Bloodworth. Both actors nailed hue of emotion to near perfection and with economy and restraint despite needing to show how smitten they were by each other. Getting straight actors and a straight director to recreate what is potentially a complex gay relationship is not like novices figuring out how to make explosions look real on screen. It is not rocket science and BK's chosen rather appropriately to address affection as pure affection, with no strings tied to sexuality. One of the best parts of the narrative is exactly its economy - how it chose to 'tag' clues of Juan's married life, how a simple 'I Love You' drew the film to a bittersweet and also disturbing close. The only fissure in the plot could be the difficulty in reconciling how a one night stand can affect young Nick whose vulnerability seems an incredible surprise.
BK mentioned about the circularity in his plot during the Q&A. My first encounter with this film adds special meaning to it. I walked in late, in the middle of Juan and Nick's pensive conversation. It was not difficult to sink fast and deep into their tangle. The film ended with Nick creeping in from behind and whispering the famous three words to Juan. Like a kind of reverse cliffhanger, my payoff came when I stayed for the re-screening of the film and finally saw the opening, making me believe this was one lesson in telling a love story I needed to take home.
White collars mingle with artists post-screening at First Takes
It's been a long time since I paid the folks at First Takes a visit. We have been partly missing out on the First Takes reviews because some of the films have already been reviewed by us. It is just amazing how First Takes continues to be that stage for new filmmakers to say 'at least we've got a public screening!' And of no judgement to the quality of films selected, First Takes also seems an important platform for certain films that have been subject-driven rather than craft-driven, for the post-screening Q & A also throws up useful dialogue and food for thought.
'Mi Fa So' was one such film. It is a documentary about a blind girl who finds her calling in music and playing the keyboard which she uses a colour code to recognise. Apparently, she can detect variations in light and some colours. She is the eldest of 3 daughters and the film had moments like her younger sisters saying how they try to help big sister that drew a smile on me. However, the film fits into what some would say a TV format - find a gripping topic, interview key players in the story and string them together in a classic 'all sides of the story' documentary, when sometimes, the documentarian would have done himself or herself a favour by asserting a point of view, rather than just presenting an observation. One might also argue the choice of the subject is part of the craft. This is where I must give credit to the filmmaker for finding a blind girl who has a hungrier feistier spirit that people around her. Interestingly, when she proclaimed 'I love you' to her mother in front of the camera, one wonders if she is being expressively herself or her condition has blinded her to the kind of social awkwardness many Asian display, being less comfortable with expressing their love in public, least of all in front of a rolling camera.
For those of you who like the nostalgic or saturated colours of lomo-photographs and wished those images could move, here is something kickass, it is called the LomoKino.
Bringing analogue back to the movies with a bang in the 21st century, the LomoKino is a Lomography movie camera that shoots short, creative movies on 35mm film.
t’s here to bring the unpredictable, unique and original qualities of analogue photography that we love back into moviemaking. It’s here to offer you something truly beautiful and authentic – An analogue movie camera that opens up a whole new direction of experimentation and a world of creative possibilities.
And you use it like this:
Load your film
Load the LomoKino with any kind of 35mm film that takes your fancy – Color Negative, Slide, Black and White; the choice is yours
Focus
Shooting a subject over 1m away? You don’t have to do a thing to focus. Want to shoot closer than 1m? Just hold down the close-up button on the front of the camera and you can focus up to 0.6m
Control your aperture
The LomoKino has continuous aperture settings from f/5.6 to f/11 – There is no step between each aperture, so you can effortlessly adjust the aperture setting at any time during shooting
Shoot!
Shooting a movie with the LomoKino is easy – After you’ve loaded your film, just rotate the advancing crank to start making your movie
Wanna know more, check out this website.
http://microsites.lomography.com/lomokino/
And here is the most important bit, YOU can win one of these cameras!
SINdie and Lomography have tied up to co-launch a fun filmmaking challenge for everyone. You get to play with this camera if shortlisted and we have 2 Lomokinos together with other prizes to giveaway! Stay tuned to SINdie for more details!
For more information on Lomography and the Lomokino, check out these sites!
Fairytales or 童话, a short film by Kelvin Sng is now out in stores. In Fairytales, Jason, Amanda and Guna are three teenagers studying in the same school. On the surface, they are just like any other teenager out there, facing typical challenges of growing up. However, beneath this façade lie rooted issues that have grown too deep for them to handle, causing them to become disillusioned by making choices that lead to disastrous consequences. Nonetheless, the trio soon discovers that no matter how many wrong choices they have made in the past, it is never too late to choose again.
The DVD comes with the following features:
1) Trailer
2) Behind the Scenes
3) Music Video
4) Highlights of Gala Premiere
5) Director’s Statement
6) Photo Gallery
7) Director’s commentary
Available at all major video stores such as Popular CD-RAMA, Gramophone, HMV, Kinokuniya, Poh Kim Video and TS Laser. Grab your copy now!
Three People Filmswas born in the depths of a cold, dark studio in the basement of the Wee Kim Wee School of Communication, NTU, Singapore. They are made up of, *drumroll* 3 people of course! Get to know more about these 3 student filmmakers here.
Score good karma points, help to raise funds for them to produce a short film, Staring at the Sun.
The Thee People Films will create 1 second of film for every $1 you donate above $30. These awesome people are also giving away lots of other goodies including postcards, tshirts, DVDs and personalized posters to say thanks for the support!
Here is part 2 of the Cine65 dialogue between SINdie writers Jeremy and Yizhen. This time, it is the student category. Part 1 of Cine65 dialogue can be read here.
--
Jeremy: It is interesting to see how people interpret Singapore at this juncture when it is a country that in the middle soooo many changes. I mean the election, more online commentary and all
Yizhen: For sure. proliferation of online channels for people to go to for more sources have changed the scene drastically
J: What's are yr first thoughts on the entries?
Y: I think for the entires this year for cine65 is really impressive. it is interesting to see how different people interpret how they see Singapore as home and how they view what are the essential national values. how about u?
J: I see quite a spectrum. The good ones are really good. But there are also mediocre ones that are almost like total defence ads.However, there are no bad ones.... and i must say also that everyone seems to have access to very good quality cameras!
Y: My sentiments exactly!! If it were a few years ago, it'll be harder for people to get good cameras… but i guess that also goes to show how far sg film making has come to
J: Yes. And I bet many were shooting on the all-too-common 5D Mark 2 to give that film and TV ad look. I must also say that some of the student entries were neck and neck with the open professional categories. That being said, of course, students also = film students, not just secondary sch students haha
Y: There was also a primary school entry that got selected!
J: Was it the one with all the boys from the 3 races playing football?
Y: nope, it's "We must ourselves defend Singapore" nominated for best sound design
J: Ah, I remember that, students training in the jungle hahaha
Y: i assume "CCKPS Production" means cChua Chu Kang Primary School Production
Jeremy says: Haha, I did wonder for a while but CCK is a commonly used acronym for Chua Chu Kang in SG!
Y: yeah it is. don't we singaporeans love acronyms?
J: I hate it when people abuse it. And I love it when people use to unintentionally hilarious effect
Y: idea for next year's Sindie national day vid? :p
J: Possible. :) Looking at the student section... Favourite actress? (strange category though considering the little screen time each gets)
Y: yeah, agreed. but i think they judge on how endearing the actresses are to the viewer/judge?
J: Hahaha, that's funny. My fav among the nominees is the mother in why do I keep ticking? She is classic and does not mince her words! I have to say many of the other actors and actresses were more in posey shots.
Y: she is the most natural in front of the camera out of the rest of the nominees and the way she speaks is very relatable as well!
J: Like your mum? Haha
Y: YES
J: So you think she is best actress?
Y: for this category, i personally think its a close fight between Project Home actress and mother from Why Do I Keep Ticking. Si Ling, the little sister delivered her lines pretty well though the screenplay may be a little too staged… have to give credit to her as well, in my opinion.
Project Home
J: In Project Home I preferred the Ah Ma than the girl though :P
Y: haha the last scene when the ahma wiped her tears away got to you right
J: Yah. and I could not tell if the white hair and wrinkles were make up or not, some parts seemed to suggest that lady acting as the Ah Ma was a little younger than the real character.
Y: yeah agreed
J: Moving on, the favourite actor category is interesting. I mean even the Filipino guy in S.I.N.G.A. whi played a bit part got nominated!
Y: hahaha. It is a very interesting choice What's your take on the nominees? my favorite is the prata man how about yours?
J: Not difficult to make that choice, ain't it?
Y: among them all, yeah. he is very genuine when he delivers his lines and is v believable
J: He's the one who makes the most effort and his humour works! He's got such a knack for interacting with characters, especially the small girl
Y: haha yes! and the group of customers when he introduced his Singapore Prata
J: And I bet he did not need to rehearse too much!
Y: why do you say so?
J: He looks like a natural and his interaction with the little girl was a breeze. I think if he needed to rehearse a lot, it would have affected the little girl's performance, esp if she was made to do it over and over again
y: in short, he's a natural actor, somebody hire him already! wait, let him win this category first haha
J: Haha Notice this category is called the 'Favourite Actor' category
Y: so i guess we both agree the prata man should win?
J: not the best actor category. Yes I agree Prata man wins hands down
Y: yeah, so like i said, they are probably choosing actors who are most endearing to the judges not whether they have the longest screen time
J: Like the young in Homebound, he's more like being an eye-candy poster boy than acting his role. And what did you think of Butter Chong, the miniature singer? Haha
Y: true. he can be replaceable with any other good looking boy. i think butter chong is really funny! not bad
J: I would not say funny, but ernest, yes! What do you think of that video actually? The miniatures one?
Y: its cute. both actors really put in a lot of effort with all the exaggeration i think it helped to pump up the MV for some reasons i didn't mind the exaggerated acting for the mv
J: Yeah, I think it works and it is really spirited! But I wished they would cut down on the 'big' guy's reactions shots. We could have done with less repetitions. Made him seem a bit 'acting up'
Y: true but the original song they came up w is really catchy
J: Alright, away with the cynic in me, agree. :P
Y: that MV is not bad, they are nominated in other categories as well!
J: Yes, and I think they deserve to win Best Art Direction! Playing with miniatures, cuts outs, was a nice novel way to represent the over-used icons of Singapore. Sorry, correction , nauseating icons haha
Y: such a cynic! but i did enjoy this very lighthearted take about youths no longer knowing the history of Singapore
J: Yes, I think overall, it is very novel.
Y: how about cinematography who should win?
J: So you agree that Year of Independence deserves to win Best Art Direction?
Year of Independence
Y: yeah its the most interesting out of the other nominees
J: What's god art direction for you? I mean Year of Independence is an obvious choice, but if we take that out, which one would you have chosen?
Y: I think 2365. You?
J: I guess so. I am puzzled about the nominations of the other entries, they are good in other ways but art directon? Questionable
Y: hmm
2365
J: I have to say 2365 looks too ordinary though, with the best art decision in the film being the choice of using the shot from the inside of the letterbox. It's an ordinary shot but in the context of all that letter writing, that angle I felt adds visual meaning to the film. So much for a camera angle, haha, let's move on to cinematography
Y: haha alright
J: Whats yr choice?
Y: the singapore river. very iconic but then again, its an easy choice to shoot
J: Argh, we need to find one where we disagree! haha! So tell me why this is your favourite?
Y: hahahahah actually i kind of dislike and like the Singapore river choice
J: OH! Tell me why?!!!
Y: because the Singapore river location is such an easy location to think about but i believe other students would also shoot the singapore rivers as well i really enjoy the beautiful vintage feel or the cinematography
J: Yeah, the smooth and flawless tracking shots bowled me over
Y: the cinematography also works with the narration
J: Yes, the filters...but most importantly, I think the DOP mastered the pacing well
Y: yes
J: and the camera movements were well-timed with the character's reactions and movements
Y: however i found this video very similar to the 2011 SIA commercial (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lto5IomU25k)
Jeremy says: You just hit the nail of what I was about to say! The video definitely very TVC, and even more, it looked strangely familiar
Y: agreed. we seem to be agreeing a lot!
J: I have a complaint about many of the entries. And it kinda shows how some Singaporeans still see Singapore. There is a lack of questioning. Most of the entries are little exercises in taking Singapore at face value and just putting on a rosy set of lenses
Y: then again, this is cine65 is launched by nexus. its a government body and the contest is to help with national education
J: Pretty little works but nothing much to scrape off the film. True
Y: actually i think Homebound could be the only one that might hold a little tinge of doubt from the way it was shot i might over read into this
J: Oh tell me why?
Y: but i feel that in his motion of using photography to capture whatever "essence" he felt he was missing from Singapore
J: What did you see in it?
Y: is kind of a desperate move because, for photography, as well as in film you choose to film what you want to see and in the action of photography, you choose what you already thought you know about Singapore or in the case of the boy, who came back from the States after being away from Singapore for a long time, will know much less of what he thinks Singapore is
J: That's an interesting point.
Y: and if you realize he put up a collage of his neighbours and not iconic Singapore momentos and when he came back from the army, he was greeted by his neighbors and thats where he calls "home" not, the usual singapore locations or icons other entries used
J: It was surreal but it worked for me
Y: and what is unique about this is how the States is similar to Singapore in a way that both countries are multiracial an assimilation of cultures when he comes back to Singapore, this multiracial aspect is what is similar to Singapore so i guess, he still could not clearly identify what is home but then again, i might be reading into too much of such a short clip
J: I must say on my first impression of viewing the film, I did not take too much away from it. In fact, it seemed to be like the boy in Boo Junfeng's Keluar Baris who is rediscovering his country and immediate surroundings, except, being less emotional and cynical about it. BUt it is interesting that you have pointed that it is one of the few films that are tinged with a bit of self-questioning. One favourites appear again in the Best Sound Design nominations - The Year of Independence. What's your take?
Y: i think they should win because of the effort they took to write and compose an original song but not fair because they did a music vid let see the other nominees
J: I agree. This is quite a no-brainer category though I must give special mention to Why Do I keep Tickiing?
Y: agreed
J: I liked it because its simple use of the ticking of the clock synched in well with his race to finish his 'Singapore All-Star Buffet'
Y: i enjoyed the way they used the ticking to signal urgency and in-between the meals there were the use of clicking of plates and cups. faster, and more urgent
J: Yes, sound design should not just be about music. Moving on, how about Best Screenplay?
Y: i really liked Why Do I Keep Ticking because of the twist at the endthe rest have cliché endings, except for SINGA, which i really enjoyed as well, so for me its SINGA and Why Do I Keep Ticking
J: I have to agree that the rest of the nominees pale in comparison with SINGA and Why Do I Keep Ticking. Key is like a filial piety ad by MYCS. Project Home could have explored the senility of the Ah Ma more instead of using the 'project' framework which diluted the message. Jeremy says: I felt the story of giving back to Ah Ma already answers the competition brief
Y: hmm actually i think its a bit of woody allen to see the director direct for Project Home
J: Haha
Y: but lacks the speak tot he audience bit. then again, its very expected, and screenplay can be improved
J: I find it a bit difficult to draw the link between Woody Allen and that film though
Y: as i said before i think the girl was very natural in her role in the short clip
J: I have a love-hate relationship with Minimart. Can you guess why?
Y: the screenplay? and choice of actors..
J: Love and hate for the same reasons. love cos the revelation of the girl's blindness added a nice touch to the film. BUt at that same time, it was exploitative. Remember the ad about the blind girl aired during YOG? Rings the bell doesn't it?
Y: yeah. somehow, we have already identified 2 entries that have drawn inspiration from gov ads already...
J: What do you think of SINGA? I feel it's like a roughly cut stone with some potential
Y: that too. perhaps can give a little more backstory on why there is this SINGA test and what are the stakes then will make the story more compelling
J: Yeah, that was pretty random. haha. I found the humour rather kooky but the approach quite refreshing. The Filipion guy was of course a nice touch to the story
Y: which i think thats why he is also nominated for favorite actor, haha
J: That for me, makes Why Do I Keep Ticking stand out as the best screenplay. It is actually a story that work better on literature and the written word than the visual because it is driven by a whim, an almost unrealistic one. But packing the food into the luggage as a visual statement added quite a punch and of course, the nice circular end to the story with Ah Ma's chicken. :)
Y: yeah. the screenplay was well thought out, even with that last punch on remembering he has actually missed out home cooked food by his ah ma. favorite entry for screenplay for sure
J: I am rather hesitant about the Best Editing category because some of the best editing do not serve to help the winning stories That makes it hard to decide.
Y: yeah, I found it hard to make a choice as well. makes me wonder why some of the films were shortlisted in the said catergories
J: Yes, A calculated guess for me would be The Year of Independence
Y: becus of the small magical man ? i wonder what are the criterias for the categories
J: The novelty, but I would give my personal vote to Homebound.Because the editing does more than piecing together a montage. like in 'I am Singapore', it is not linear like 'Helping Hands'. The time transition touch from colour to black and white was quite nifty though. The criteria for best editing?. What do u think?
Y: from what u have mentioned it should be original, and different and at least an effort to make the film stand out ?
J: In a way, yes, but it should work in parallel with the story/screenplay to bring the message across strongly. How about you? what are yr thoughts on editing?
Y: i liked the editing of I am Singapore
J: Really?
Y: looking at this competition to be a competition about national education
J: I am surprised it did not nominated for cinematography
Y: works for me. brings back to the qn on how the films are nominated..
J: mmm... Don't you feel it is too STB?
Y: yes. it is also very similar to this series of tourism clips that recently went viral on fb, from STA travel australia
J: Ha!
Y: instead of move, learn, eat, this film uses the 5 senses
J: But what works in 'I am Singapore' for you?
Y: transitions are smooth while jumping from 1 of the senses to another
J: Maybe that's where I need to pay more attention to craft. Nominees in this category aside, were there actually other entries not nominated that caugt your eye for editing?
Y: just for this category? that'll b why do i keep ticking
Why do I keep ticking?
J: yes
Y: and 2365
J: Why 2365?
Y: smooth editing
J: A la I am Singapore?
Y: makes the linear storytelling very compelling
J: That's true, esp when linear stiorytelling can be a let down
Y: lots of cuts closeups and pans with the closeups to the writing of the letter to the long shots to the girl writing the letter. i liked it
J: Okay, I just found it too run-off-the-mill
Y: especially when this film was to emphasis on how singapore has changed from 4 digit code to 6. probably so as well. so for u, which film would you pick?
J: I also have to disagree with you on Why I keep ticking. It is one of my favourite films that largely rests on its unique and decisive storytelling. the editing however, is more a slave to the story, nothing very extraordinary there. what's yr take before I share what I observed
Y: hmm, as we discussed before some are really good. those who are impeccable pale in comparison to some others.
J: Any thing, style stand out in particular?
Y: hmm
J: Any interesting observations made about how the students directed the videos across the board? not just the nominees?
Y: they like long takes, and then using fast cuts to show anticipation. always from 1 persons' POV.
J: Yes, I noticed that
Y: and to be honest i think for such a short time for cine65 the directing may not be fluid. they either cover it up with the sound
J: Cover-ups... the cynic in me noticed a range of tools used to fill and cover up storytelling gaps. I felt all the entries were clearly told and the images presented in a polished way. But the way the direction seemed to lack punch. The storytelling gets too linear sometimes and many of the videos sound like video blogs. In which the narrator, supposedly the lead character goes through a tell-it-all exercise from the point the day begins to the point the day ends. Having said, several entries have come up with rather meaningful ways of representing the sense of home
Y: yeah those entries who did not exactly have an overarching storyline works best for me. like the postal code, living abroad, minimart
J: as in those that were more free-form?
Y: yes
J: Any examples?
Y: hmm, postal code as in 2365?
J: yes
Y: why do u say these few films you have selected to have came up with ways that are meaningful?
J: Well, I applaud them for not drawing out the obvious elements like food, HDB flat, Mother's cooking etc
Y: which film is for living abroad again?what is the title?
J: Homebound and Long Ride Home
Y: is it because they focus more on people relations rather than aspects of Singapore life? thats why they mean something to u? i guess that also represents how u see Singapore as well? because you can relate to those films
J: You brought out a gd point. Perhaps that opinion of mine is a personal opinion, not a qualified general opinion that Singapore to means represents the personal friendships and relationships and ties. Singapore to me means XXXXXXXX
Y: yeah i get what you mean. I think this competition actually suss out what people see of Singapore
J: Yes, back to my former qn, which entries were u referring to that were did not have an overarching storyline?
Y: oh, like Singapore Prata, conducted like an interview style
J: Ah!
Y: or the film that's translated into an MV, i think those entries are pretty refreshing. it's a totally different take
J: I buy what you say about Singapore Prata being able to change the overriding beat if the entries, it's refreshing
Y: so what you think should deserve to win that category of best directing?
J:I feel if I said Singapore Prata, it would just end the conversation haha. It is a clear winner in its own right, directed with lots of heart and generous dashes of humour. I need to give credit to the nuanced touch in Long Ride Home, the thoughtful shot compositions in 2365, the pure acting gold in Key and the well-deliberated storytelling in Homebound,
Y: these students did do their best in directing and creating these films. their style of directing showed us what mattered to them about Singapore and what the brief meant to them. As for Long Ride Home, I noticed that homebound is made by a photographer. The film has very good shots, but directing wise, it is not tight enough.
Homebound
J: True, but I liked how it had a circularity to it
Y: the way the actors were placed, the camera angles were all very good for shots, to me, the choices where the angles were placed and how the camera moved did not work tightly enough with the plot. i think it's more of a photography project than a directorial one
J: However, I disagree that the direction only reflected his photography training. I feel there was still a strong, overall narrative direction to the video. everything drove towards the 'surprise' ending. Which part did the shots not meld well with the narrartive?
Y: for me, it was the scene where the 2 boys were sitting in at the CBD area in front of the river. shot from the boys back/cut/shot from in front of the boys talking. It was a bit unrealistic, and staged. For these shots did not work for me. I understand the significance for the "moment" of the story to be held at the CBD area where they were talking about life and career, but it felt awkward to me.
J: Yeah, a little too deliberate
Y: and the filter of the shot also made it seem very "photography". if i paused that scene. it will look good. and if i paused the scene where the shot was of the boys' backs, these 2 shots will be part of a photographer exhibition of the same theme. perhaps if directing wise, you can do the faceshot/cut/shot back and forth at another location will work better.
J: My peeve is more the acting and the casting. The way the taxi's son interacted with his father at the end seemed he was self-consciously delivering a punchline. But I still its nomination is justified, even for best film. What's yr take on the nonimees for Best Film?
Y: What are the factors for best films i wonder. what should be considered? all of the other sub cats?
J: Well, I feel in the best film, the sum of the ingredients do not make the cake. It is beyond 1+1=2. What's yr view?
J: if thats the case is very subjective right? if criteria not set in stone. but question again is how to justify good films. i think best film should have a unique interpretation of the brief, good storyline, and directorial style
J: Agree. I feel it can be an entry that may not have appeared in the other nominations.For me, it's a gut feel thing. If you walk away remembering a film, its done its job
yizhen says: if a film have to leave an impression on you, to walk away and remember the film, i argue that it has to have a strong content, storyline and together with tight directing, then it will leave impressions on people.Which of the films then do it for you?
Y: to me the obvious is Singapore Prata. it is original relatable acting and the directing and editing are seamlessly. Topnotch.
Singapore Prata
J: For me, it is a tough choice between that and The Year of Independence.Both spirited in their styles
Y: besides being spirited.why the year of independence worked for u and why they should win overall film?
J: Putting an endearing guitar strumming guy amidst miniature cutouts of Singapore landscapes.
It sings for me
Y: directing skills? what do u think of that film
J: Brownie points for conceptualising, not necessarily directing.
Y: ahhhh, ok
J: I only remembered a lot of grinning in that clip lol
Y: for me it was a lot of exaggerated actions, but i was laughing along
J:If you were to walkaway remembering only one film, which on would it be among the nominees?
Y: actually, it will be SINGA
S.I.N.G.A
J: Interesting
Y: because of the storyline, not necessary of the choice of actors, directing skills or cinematography. that was the only film that poked fun at our fear of the ISA, overtly used it in their "SINGA" test as the source of fear and then turned back and questioned. what we should be as Singaporeans. we don't need a test to determine whether we are Singaporeans. we should know we are. those Singapore icons, locations, food, relationships, need not necessary make us singpaorean. we should know
J: A film that has BALLS, that what you like :)
Y: wahahhahaha
J: Yes!
Y: i guess, it also reflects what i have been feeling recently about singapore, with the influx of foreign talent. with the various actors used in the film, and the ridiculous answers that were given, it shows of the "multiracial" aspect singapore gov is aiming at. it is also reminded me of the test all immigrants in US have to take to pass before getting their official green card
J:I'd like to take the 'ballsy' stance too but the romantic in me is also just as loud
Y: do we necessarily have to have that test implemented in singapore, to determine whether one needs to have a PR status as well? i mean, yeah sure. but these systems all have flaws. i like a film that questions the systems. not just a romantic or nostalgic or a demoralized view about Singapore, which almost all films have captured
J: True true. As a final note, I can also see that Singapore Prata is quite ballsy too. In not trying to lyrical and art-housey
Y: yeah.
Our Predictions for the Winners
Overall Best Film
Jeremy: Year of Independence
Yizhen: Singapore Prata
Best Direction
Jeremy: Long Ride Home
Yizhen: 2365
Best Editing
Jeremy: Year of Independence
Yizhen: I am Singapore
Best Screenplay
Jeremy: Minimart
Yizhen: S.I.N.G.A.
Best Sound Design
Jeremy: Year of Independence
Yizhen: Why Do I keep Ticking?
Best Cinematography
Jeremy: Year of Independence
Yizhen: 2365
Best Art Direction
Jeremy: Year of Independence
Yizhen: Year of Independence
Favourite Actor
Jeremy: Butter Chong, Year of Independence
Yizhen: Ahmed Ali Khan, Singapore Prata
Favourite Actress
Jeremy: Ah Ma, Project Home
Yizhen: Mother, Why Do I Keep Ticking
Rated PG13 for horror theme and disturbing scenes, this movie won’t be the scariest picture you would see. Chan tries a little too hard to set up the frights, and although there are a few effective shocks, they are few and far between. Besides the fact these moments come across as cheap scares, what you’d get from a large part of the 78-minute production are soldiers looking disturbed, frightened and anxious.
