Classic Schoolhouse Rock video shows how a bill becomes a law. Great stuff!
Year: 2017
Film Review: CHURCHILL (UK 2017) ***
Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival: http://www.wildsound.ca
A ticking-clock thriller following Winston Churchill in the 96 hours before D-Day.
Director: Jonathan Teplitzky
Writer: Alex von Tunzelmann
Stars: Brian Cox, Miranda Richardson, John Slattery
Review by Gilbert Seah
CHURCHILL begins with the scene of an image of World War I and II Prime Minister Winston Churchill standing on an isolated beach. He imagines blood washed by the sea on its shores while his black bowler hat eventually floats out into the vast horizon. The scene is rich in metaphors while being solemn, setting the mood for a 2-hour film on a Winston Churchill most of the world do not know. It is a Churchill depicted as a bully, drunk and opinionated self-pitying cad.
It is the week before the planned D-Day landing on the beaches of Normandy which everyone knows led to the defeat of Germany in World War II. No one is aware of the victory of D-Day in the film, and the planning is set with uncertainty. Churchill, after his failure of the Gallipoli war which resulted in the loss of thousands of young British men, was intent not to let the mistake of leading thousands to their death happen again. So, he would stop the D-Day landing at all costs. But planning was already under way,. Everyone including Dwight D. Eisenhower (John Slattery) and Bernard Montgomery (Julian Wadham) believed that the landing would be instrumental in winning the War against the Nazis.
The trouble with this film is hat there is not much story but much repetition of the same storyline. Churchill is against the landing. He is shown the truth and he will only budge at the very end after learning that he had no choice. Still, the film still hails Churchill as a great man, as the title ‘the greatest Briton that ever lived’ is flashed on screen.
There are scenes that show Churchill at his worst. These include those where he is constantly pouring himself whisky and more so, when he takes it out on his secretary, screaming at her for little reason. The script, written by Alex von Tunzelmann is full of great oratorical speeches, which is expected as this is a story of a man who gave the great speeches.
British actor Brian Cox is nothing short of stunning in the title role of the Prime Minister. Cox is currently of the same age as Churchill during the time of the story. The supporting performances of Slattery and Wadham are also impressive. But arguably, the best performance comes surprisingly from Miranda Richardson as Clementine Churchill, his long suffering wife. She does not have the freedom of the luxury of leaving her husband no matter how tortured the marriage had become. The film emphasizes the importance of duty during the War.
CHURCHILL is a war drama without any battle scenes. It would serve as an effective prelude to the upcoming summer blockbuster DUNKIRK, directed by Christopher Nolan which reported is supposed to depict the horrific realities of the landing of the Allied forces on the Normandy beaches. CHURCHILL only hints of the horrors of the landing.
Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVOzMZ4IrMA
Also, Free logline submissions. The Writing Festival network averages over 95,000 unique visitors a day.
Great way to get your story out: http://www.wildsound.ca/logline.html
Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival:http://www.wildsound.ca
Watch recent Writing Festival Videos. At least 15 winning videos a month:http://www.wildsoundfestival.com
Film Review: BEATRIZ AT DINNER (USA 2017) ***
Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival: http://www.wildsound.ca
A holistic medicine practitioner attends a wealthy client’s dinner party after her car breaks down.
Director: Miguel Arteta
Writer: Mike White
Stars: Salma Hayek, John Lithgow, Connie Britton
Review by Gilbert Seah
Director Miguel Arteta and scriptwriter Mike White have worked together many times and are famous for their quirky little gems, the most notable being their debut feature, CHUCK AND BUCK. Their latest film BEATRIZ AT DINNER, which opened Sundance continues the trend.
The film opens with shots of Breatriz (Salma Hayek) at her home. She owns a goat and dog, works at a Cancer Centre and is at home with nature and healing. Just as one would dismiss this woman, who believes in reincarnation and giving back to the planet as a new age floozy, director Arteta and scriptwriter White slowly and effectively wins her over to the audience’s side. This is partly due to pitting her against a real nasty opposite human being, one that delights in the sport of hunting, disposing of wild life and displacing innocent people form their homes, a filthy rich land developer called Doug Struut (John Lithgow).
It all starts, innocently enough when Beatriz gives wealthy client Cathy (Connie Britton) a massage at her home. When Beatriz’s car is unable to start, she is invited to stay for the husband Grant’s (David Warshofsky) company dinner party – a celebration of some big deal the company has succeeded in winning.
The dinner guests arrive one couple at a time. It is clear that Beatriz and the dinner guests are not of the same ‘human’ wavelength. Except for Cathy who has more respect and tolerance for Beatriz, because she has helped her family with their child’s recuperation from cancer, each of the other dinner guests, including her husband treats Breatriz with a certain disdain that she is beneath them in class.
Arteta builds his film effectively to an escalating climax. Things reach a boiling point when Beatriz discovers how evil Strutt is and that a lot of evil in the world including her personal family loss are a direct result of his actions. It is emphasized that fate occurs for a reason. Soon she realizes that she could have been present for the dinner for a reason as fate dictates. She could root out evil at its source by murdering Strutt.
Salma Hayek delivers an excellent performance as the holistic nurse driven almost to righteous insanity. John Lithgow is equally excellent as the menacing villain, the one the audience would gladly stab in the back. All the supporting actors are equally good, credit given to the excellent casting.
A lot of films have used music or a song to break the monotony of a film or to create a highlight. Director Marlene Ape did it with her character rendering a full version of the Whitney Houston song “The Greatest Love of All” in TONY ERDMANN that earned the very rare standing ovation midway in the film at Cannes. Arteta attempts the same feat, with Hayek singing a Spanish song, to the accompaniment of her guitar playing. Though the words are in Spanish, the effect is no less powerful.
BEATRIZ AT DINNER ends with a non-typical happy ending that might not satisfy everyone. But one must remember that this is not ones typical standard film, but a quirky Arteta/White collaboration.
Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCLNTmNj5bI
Also, Free logline submissions. The Writing Festival network averages over 95,000 unique visitors a day.
Great way to get your story out: http://www.wildsound.ca/logline.html
Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival:http://www.wildsound.ca
Watch recent Writing Festival Videos. At least 15 winning videos a month:http://www.wildsoundfestival.com
Film Review: MEGAN LEAVEY (USA 2017) ***
Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival: http://www.wildsound.ca
Based on the true life story of a young Marine corporal whose unique discipline and bond with her military combat dog saved many lives during their deployment in Iraq.
Director: Gabriela Cowperthwaite
Writers: Pamela Gray, Annie Mumolo
Stars: Kate Mara, Ramon Rodriguez, Tom Felton
Review by Gilbert Seah
MEGAN LEAVEY is a film about a girl and her dog. Based on a true story written by Pamela Gray with the help of Annie Mumolo (BRIDESMAIDS), Tim Lovestedt, and Jordan Roberts, the story’s setting often shifts to an Afghanistan combat war zone where female Marine Megan Leavey and a combat dog named Rex have the task of exposing explosives that would lead to the saving of many lives. The film stresses the unique bond between man (or in this case woman) and man’s best friend.
The many times told similar tale of man’s best friend comes complete with owner and dog running together from a distance re-united to scenes where the canine saves the life of its owner or in this case, dog handler. The title of the film MEGAN LEAVEY, the name of the combatant, implies that the owner is given more importance that the canine. In fact, the dog does not appear till about 30 minutes through the film.
The film works on many accounts. The most important fact is the script and director Cowperthwaite’s effort in connecting the audience with the main character, Leavey. A well-written voiceover informs the audience at the film’s start of Leavey’s problem of a lack of motivation in her home town. When she is fired because she is unable to connect with other people, she joins the marines. The film takes time to show her relationship with an unsympathetic mother who fails to understand. By including scenes of Leavey suffering through boot camp, the audience sees that Leavey has accepted the punishment unfairly dished out to her.
The film gets a bit too sappy at parts. The cliche of the dog teaching Leavey human lessons is carried out a bit too far. The dog and Leavey’s separation and reunion are milked for sentimentality.
For the few battle scenes that are present, Peter McNulty’s clever editing captures the suspense and terror of the soldiers securing a few buildings that are littered with hidden explosives and unseen gunmen. Leavey and the dog, called Sergeant Rex are deployed twice in Iraq, first in Fallujy in 2005 and again in Ramadi in 2206. During the latter, both were injured by an improvised explosive device.
While Leavey was awarded the Purple Heart and the Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal with a “V” device denoting heroism in combat with retirement, Rex was pulled back into service with another handle till Rex suffered from facial palsy, which ended his bomb-sniffing duties. This fact was surprisingly omitted in the film.
The film contains one over-preachy part when Megan’s father tells her to keep on trying and never give up despite constant failure, which is supposed to spur her to overturn a decision from preventing her adopting Rex.
The film omits the last few retirement years of Rex with Leavey though clips of the real Rex are shown during the closing credits emphasizing that the film is based on true events. Bring lots of Kleenex to this one.
Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGGcFbW__XI
Also, Free logline submissions. The Writing Festival network averages over 95,000 unique visitors a day.
Great way to get your story out: http://www.wildsound.ca/logline.html
Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival:http://www.wildsound.ca
Watch recent Writing Festival Videos. At least 15 winning videos a month:http://www.wildsoundfestival.com
Film Review: IT COMES AT NIGHT (USA 2017)
Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival: http://www.wildsound.ca
Secure within a desolate home as an unnatural threat terrorizes the world, a man has established a tenuous domestic order with his wife and son, but this will soon be put to test when a desperate young family arrives seeking refuge.
Director: Trey Edward Shults
Writer: Trey Edward Shults (screenplay)
Stars: Joel Edgerton, Christopher Abbott, Carmen Ejogo
Review by Gilbert Seah
IT COMES AT NIGHT begins with a taut medical examination of an older man later revealed to be Bud (David Pendleton) lying on a made-shift stretcher infested with lesions and boils. “Can you hear me?” is the question asked. After the examination, the patient is carted off, to the woods outside a boarded up shack where he is crudely wrapped up and burnt with gasoline.
It has all been done before. Despite writer/director Shults’s genuine effort of differentiating his film from the end of the world plaque infested survival horror flick, one cannot help but feel a certain similarity of events from start to end. Never mind the carefully planned shocks, the effective use of enclosed space (cinematography by Drew Daniels) and darkness and never mind the effective use of sound to scare the audience. It does not help that the script has no plot twists or has the addition of more human interaction.
The story first appears to be told from the point of view of the first family’s 17-year old teen son, Travis (Kevin Harrison Jr.) But the view shifts later on the film as Travis has less screen presence. The only survives on display appear to be his family. Order is kept in the home by his father, Paul (Joel Edgerton who also co-produced the film). His mother, Sarah (Carmen Ejogo) is present and also an assortment of farm animals and dog, who are allowed in the house, apparently to prevent them from catching some deadly virus. When they venture outside, they wear gas masks. It is a test of survival. When they hear a noise from outside, Tom carefully opens the door to find another man, (Christopher Abbott) looking to find his family, in this case his wife, Kim (Riley Keough) and baby some food.
Shults does not make any effort or even need to explain his film. After the first scene (described above), the audience can correctly deduce that the apocalyptic film is in the near future. A plaque has deserted most of civilization. The family on display is surviving at all costs. As expected there are intruders from the outside. The two families ave something to share or trade. But mistrust exists and survival takes place with sacrifice of their human souls.
It is easier to make a faultless minimalist horror film like this one that a complex film with flaws. IT COMES BY NIGHT falls into the first category.
It does not help that the film does not have a happy Hollywood ending or a closed one at that. Despite all the film’s plusses, IT COMES AT NIGHT does not succeed at all as an original or absorbing drama or horror film.
Schultz, whose first feature KRISHA secured Shults some fame, which resulted in a two-picture deal with A24 films, IT COMES AT NIGHT being the first one. The film had its premiere in April this year at the The Overlook Film Festival. The film has so far, garnered favourable reviews.
Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YOYHCBQn9g
Also, Free logline submissions. The Writing Festival network averages over 95,000 unique visitors a day.
Great way to get your story out: http://www.wildsound.ca/logline.html
Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival:http://www.wildsound.ca
Watch recent Writing Festival Videos. At least 15 winning videos a month:http://www.wildsoundfestival.com
Film Review: ABACUS: SMALL ENOUGH TO JAIL (USA 2017) ***
Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival: http://www.wildsound.ca
A small financial institution called Abacus becomes the only company criminally indicted in the wake of the United States’ 2008 mortgage crisis.
Director: Steve James
Stars: Neil Barofsky, Ti-Hua Chang, Margaret Colin
Review by Gilbert Seah
ABACUS is an old Chinese adding machine that was commonly used by Chinese shopkeepers who needed to do some accounting or simple addition. It is also a Chinese treasure now made obsolete with the introduction of the calculator. Abacus is thus chosen as the appropriate name for the bank founded by a well-intentioned Chinese lawyer turned banker, who we are introduced to at the start of the film as a good man, who thinks of himself as George Bailey, the James Stewart banker character in Frank Capra’s IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE. In fact when there is a run on Abacus, Mr. Thomas Sung is likened to Bailey giving a sincere speech to the queue of customers assuring them that the bank is ernest and hat their money is safe.
Why a documentary of this bank and on the man Mr. Sung? The reason, according to the director is that this small Chinese bank has been unfairly singled out by the NYC District Attorney’s Office as a fraudulent bank who with its owners had committed a crime in misappropriating funds for personal and illegal gain.
But the D.A. Office picked the wrong man to pick a fight with. Mr. Sung is a fighter. The documentary is an account of the fight between the small guy and the bully, a David vs. Goliath story where the slingshot weapon used was the team of Mr. Sung’s lawyers and family.
Director gets the audience on Mr. Sung’s side by using a variety of means. The first is to connect the audience with Mr. Sung’s immediate family. Besides the analogy of George Bailey, the honest and best example of a banker, one cannot help but root for the Sung family, especially watching scenes where the family sit together to argue the facts and to fight back against the D.A. Office. Interviews are also conducted with reporters who take the side of the bank. The bank is also shown to have done good to help the Chinese community to obtain loans, which no normal bank would normally grant.
The film also documents how the bank got into trouble – in fact twice with regard to fraudulence. But according to the film, the bank had fired the dishonest and despicable loan officer, Mr. Ken Lu who the D.A. Office used to testify against the bank.
The film is a sad story of the Sung family. But the film makes a hero of Mr. Sung and his family. One of the daughters who worked at that time for the D.A. Office had to reign due to, obviously conflict of interest but she did so to help her father. Not surprisingly, the wife, Mrs. Sung says on camera that she never wanted her husband or daughters to go into the banking business.
ABACUS achieves the feat of making the subject even more intriguing by hitting all the right buttons. Everyone loves to see the underdog win, especially when fighting an evil giant. ABACUS is such a tale with a smashing finish.
Trailer: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/abacus/15c410ca34696ff5?projector=1
Also, Free logline submissions. The Writing Festival network averages over 95,000 unique visitors a day.
Great way to get your story out: http://www.wildsound.ca/logline.html
Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival:http://www.wildsound.ca
Watch recent Writing Festival Videos. At least 15 winning videos a month:http://www.wildsoundfestival.com
Film Review:DRONE (Canada 2017)
Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival: http://www.wildsound.ca
Ideologies collide with fatal results when a military drone contractor meets an enigmatic Pakistani businessman.
Director: Jason Bourque
Writers: Paul A. Birkett, Jason Bourque
Stars: Sean Bean, Patrick Sabongui, Mary McCormack
Canadian director Jason Bourque directs this new thriller shot entirely in his native Vancouver, British Columbia. The film centres on a drone pilot who conducts covert operations from his hometown.
DRONE begins predictably with an overhead shot of a good kill, similar to the recent film about drones which is also called GOOD KILL. It is an effective device – the overhead shot. But the problem in this film, is that it has been used in drone films all too often already and the taut atmosphere is slowly diffused after the first segment.
An innocent girl is taken out by mistake somewhere in Pakistan. The distraught father (Patrick Sabongui), obviously seeks revenge. He is seen later on in the film, suddenly apparently a successful businessman, Mr. Shaw (without explanation) stalking the contractor that affected the kill. This contractor is Ian (Brit Sean Bean sporting an American accent in a Canadian made film) who’s father has just passed away. His wife is having an affair. His son is too quiet for comfort. Ian never visited his father regularly in the senior home. He has issues with his younger brother. Yes, Ian has family problems. Are all this necessary?
Too many incidents are crammed into an apparently what should be simple film with a solid purpose. At the funeral home, the sibling rivalry emerges but its origin is never explained. How Neil got into the drone business is also unexplained. The poor relationship between Ian’s son and wife are also left vague at best.
The constant intercutting among Pakistan and the United States is disorienting. The audience is never sure whether they are supposed to be sympathetic for be Ian or for Mr. Shaw.
The film goes about with Ian’s problem of writing his late father’s eulogy for the funeral. “Allow the story of your father have true meaning.” is the odd advice the enemy gives to Ian for the writing of his father’s eulogy.
The film is so bad, it ends up an interesting watch, but only to see how many more mistakes can be found in the film.
Performances are ordinary at best. What can one expect from a bad film with a bad script? It is also odd to phantom the reason a Canadian film would be tackling an American subject, especially when the subject of a guilty American at war (also tackled in Clint Eastwood’s AMERICAN SNIPER) has been down and done so well before.
The film has a climatic takedown at the end. But the film is confusing in whether Ian will pay for his crime.
Ian says at one point int he film to Mr. Shaw when his wife keeps talking about other matters, “We better get back to the business (selling of the boat) at hand.” This is advice the director should have taken for himself so as not to get too distract from all the too many elements in the script. This supposedly taut thriller ends up diluted with poorly executed family drama.
Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UqxCUrT5-Y
Also, Free logline submissions. The Writing Festival network averages over 95,000 unique visitors a day.
Great way to get your story out: http://www.wildsound.ca/logline.html
Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival:http://www.wildsound.ca
Watch recent Writing Festival Videos. At least 15 winning videos a month:http://www.wildsoundfestival.com
Film Review: WONDER WOMAN (USA 2017)
Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival: http://www.wildsound.ca
Before she was Wonder Woman she was Diana, princess of the Amazons, trained warrior. When a pilot crashes and tells of conflict in the outside world, she leaves home to fight a war to end all wars, discovering her full powers and true destiny.
Director: Patty Jenkins
Writers: Allan Heinberg (screenplay), Zack Snyder (story by)
Stars: Gal Gadot, Chris Pine, Robin Wright, Connie Nielsen, Danny Huston,
David Thewlis
Not to be confused with the two other WONDER WOMAN films made in 2009 and 2014, this updated expensive $149 million film has been marketed well and is one of the most anticipated films this summer.
Gal Gadot is WONDER WOMAN though the term WONDER WOMAN is never used even once in the film. She is known as Diana. The character played by Gadot, and reasonably well by her, combining sexiness and a certain ferocity was first introduced to excited audiences in BATMAN V. SUPERMAN. She gained 17 lbs. of muscle while training in martial arts for the role. Now audiences can see her for a full 140 minutes or so.
Diana first appears as a little girl fiercely intent on becoming a fighter much to the chagrin of her mother, the queen (Connie Nielson). Diana’s aunt who is also the general (Robin Wright) trains her eventually to become the warrior with special gifts destined to save the world as it is written in the Book of the Gods. The film’s voiceover informs that Diana is made from clay by the God Zeus and she must destroy the evil Ares before mankind is destroyed. As such this bevy of beauties appropriately named Amazons live on a Greek-like paradise island till a World War plane crashes into the waters nearby with the pilot, Steve Trevor (Chris Pine) saved by Diana. How the two worlds collided is never fully explained.
With the world of the Gods brought into the human realm, the film grows more interesting. Diana is drawn into fight against the Germans in WW1. The trouble with all this is that Diana, Trevor and a assorted troupe of fighters kill Germans one by one to save innocent people as well as allied soldiers. This is a very simplistic look of things as German soldiers killed are people too. The script does attempt to discuss this problem but not too convincingly. Diana is shown to be naive as to the human world, with humour thrown in whenever possible.
For a $149 million production, there are as expected, lots of special effects and pyro-technics. In addition, there are a lot of sexy fighting (but ridiculous) poses by Diana.
The film contains three villains as if one is not enough. David Thewlis plays the main one, The God of War Ares in human form. The other two villains are more comical than sinister, two Germans, one a female doctor, humorously named Dr. Poison (Elena Anaya) with a disfigured face and the other a sinister German General Erich Ludendorff (Danny Huston) who will stop at nothing to win the war.
Business wise, WONDER WOMAN cost $149 million to make, thus requiring to gross at least $460 million worldwide to break even. The estimate for the opening domestic weekend is $100 million so it likely will bring Warner Bros. a tidy profit.
The fourth film of the DC Comic Universe after SUPERMAN, BATMAN V. SUPERMAN and SUICIDE SQUAD, WONDER WOMAN is the best of the lot with a good combination of action and tongue-in-cheek humour. But that is not saying much considering how awful the first 3 were.
Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSB4wGIdDwo
Also, Free logline submissions. The Writing Festival network averages over 95,000 unique visitors a day.
Great way to get your story out: http://www.wildsound.ca/logline.html
Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival:http://www.wildsound.ca
Watch recent Writing Festival Videos. At least 15 winning videos a month:http://www.wildsoundfestival.com
Film Review: GRADUATION (Romania 2016) ****
Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival: http://www.wildsound.ca
A film about compromises and the implications of the parent’s role.
Director: Cristian Mungiu
Writer: Cristian Mungiu
Stars: Adrian Titieni, Maria-Victoria Dragus, Lia Bugnar
Review by Gilbert Seah
A stone is thrown for no reason at the start of the film breaking the living room window of Romeo’s house, as if serving as an omen for bad things to come to this self-serving man. Romeo (Adrian Titieni) is revealed to be a doctor, an unfaithful husband and for the most part in the story intent of doing what he thinks is right for his teenage daughter, Eliza (Maria-Victoria Dragus) by ensuring she wins a scholarship that will have her complete studies in the U.K.
Things take a turn when Elizabeth is assaulted one day before her exams. These exams are part of the ones that will guarantee her the U.K. scholarship. As a result of the trauma, she does not do well. In desperation, Romeo sees his friends high up in administration to fix her grades.
Mungiu’s camera doggedly follows Romeo around like a parasite, tracing his every move as he manipulates everyone around him. One can believe that he is doing it for his daughter, but eventually the main benefactor is himself. Romeo is not a despicable character. Mungiu entrusts human qualities in the man – qualities that everyone has him or herself. It is universally true that the goal in life of every parent is to see the child grow up to be better than him/her. So Romeo’s goals of ‘innocently’ helping his daughter get the scholarship is totally unbelievable. Though the film is a drama, it is so absorbing that it feels as suspenseful as a horror movie.
Worthy of note is the conformation scene between Romeo and his mistress Sandra. Sandra complains that all her life she has been second fiddle to his wife and family and at age 35, she needs a plan for her life. If this segment was shot in an American film, the two would be arguing and screaming at each other at the top of their voices and making wide gestures. But Mungiu shoots the scene with the the couple arguing with low voices. With Sandra’s head down, and speaking softly with reason, the confrontation becomes even more relevant as the audience sympathizes with her.
Also Romeo and his friends illegally scratch each others back. Romeo’s police officer offers the services of his friend to up Romeo’s daughter’s grade because the friend owes the officer a favour. Romeo offers to help his friend with his kidney transplant while he helps Romeo. They insist, fooling themselves and easing their conscience that the deed does good and they refuse any monetary exchange.
It is a fine line between siding with Romeo and despising him. Mungiu’s direction treads the fine line. A key scene of the film occurs when Romeo is looking after Sandra’s kid in the playground. The kid throws a stone at another because the other was doing something wrong.. The kid is admonished by Romeo in the same way life has done the same to him for doing what he thought was right. This is the point where Romeo claims his redemption.
GRADUATION is a meticulously executed intelligent film by Mungiu who won the Best Director Prize for this film at Cannes last year.
Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hKtgrj7UXo
Also, Free logline submissions. The Writing Festival network averages over 95,000 unique visitors a day.
Great way to get your story out: http://www.wildsound.ca/logline.html
Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival:http://www.wildsound.ca
Watch recent Writing Festival Videos. At least 15 winning videos a month:http://www.wildsoundfestival.com
Interview with Festival Director George Gänaeaard (Short Film Breaks)
Short Film Breaks is the only film festival taking place in private companies.
Contact
Matthew Toffolo: What is your Film Festival succeeding at doing for filmmakers?
Our main goal is to promote the independent filmmakers from all around the world. We love to screen films from different cultures and different backgrounds to our audience and we love to see how they react to them. For big chunks of time we accept submissions of films under no fees and when we charge fees, it’s only to transform them into prizes for the filmmakers. All in all, our main mission is to bring the films in front of our audience as easy as we possibly can, for both the filmmakers and the audience.
What would you expect to experience if you attend the festival this year (2017)?
Short Film Breaks is a special festival, because it’s the only festival taking place in private companies. That means that we are showing films to employees of private companies, right where they are working. As we like to say it, SHORT FILM BREAKS is the only film festival taking place in private companies, for an audience formed exclusively by employees, in a bid to offer smart break opportunities while promoting the independent movie industry around the world.
That means that to be able to attend the festival you’d need to be an employee of the companies that are our partners.
What are the qualifications for the selected films?
Last year we only had two categories, Best International Film and Best Romanian Film and we were expecting films under 30 minutes. But starting with 2017 we’ve expanded to many more categories, for different genres, types and styles. It’s best to check the platforms we have added Short Film Breaks on. At the moment we’re present on the following:
FilmFreeway: https://filmfreeway.com/festival/ShortFilmBreaks
FestHome: https://festhome.com/f/sfb
Reelport: https://reelport.com/festivals/8575
Click For Festivals: https://www.clickforfestivals.com/short-film-breaks
Submissions for next year’s edition will start on September 18, 2017.
Do you think that some films really don’t get a fair shake from film festivals? And if so, why?
I couldn’t answer about other festivals. I am part of a Facebook group with many other festival organizers and we all take great care of the films we receive.
At Short Film Breaks, for example, we now have two selection phases. In phase one each film is watched by three judges and only the films with top ratings advance to the second phase. In the second phase, a committee made of four judges watch them and decide who is selected for our festival. That means that before being shows in the festival a film will be watched by seven different judges. And even the ones that do not get selected have been watched by at least three.
Starting with next year we plan to introduce the Extended Deadline. This will be the final deadline, with the highest fees, but all the films that are sent to us during this deadline will receive the judging forms.
What motivates you and your team to do this festival?
Seeing our audience enjoy the films we bring in front of them, discovering new filmmakers and films, those are the best parts of our job.
But something that can’t be compared with anything else is the projections we organized in the remote parts of Nepal and Indonesia. Witnessing your children, or even adults, watch a film for the first time in their life is the highest motivation one could ask for.
How has your FilmFreeway submission process been?
We totally love FilmFreeway. It’s the platform we started with, last year, when we received just a bit under 2000 submissions. This year we’ve received 2066 films on FilmFreeway alone. Even if we also joined FestHome and Reelport, we’re received over 90% of our submissions on FilmFreeway. Amazing!!
Where do you see the festival by 2020?
We’d love to have screenings in more and more companies, to reach a wider audience. And we’d also love to continue with the special events and screenings we’re organizing in remote parts of the world. We’re in discussions now to also hold screenings in the favelas in Rio.
What film have you seen the most times in your life?
Uhm… I don’t really watch the same film too often. Fight Club and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, each about 3-4 times. But I’ve watched in excess of 4000 films, many of them made before the 70’s, many from Europe, Asia, Latin America. Watching eclectic films, from different cultures and production years, that’s the goal.
In one sentence, what makes a great film?
A film that succeeds in conveying an emotion, or a film that succeeds in changing your perception about something you were taking for granted.
How is the film scene in your city?
We have a few film festivals in Bucharest, but not the biggest in Romania, TIFF, which is taking place in Cluj-Napoca. But we have the biggest film festival for short films here, NexT International Film Festival, a partner of ours, the festival we started our projections with, back in 2014.
There are a dozen cinemas, though not as many as we’d want them to be, especially as the most of them are multiplexes, inside the malls. For a city as big as Bucharest is, we could have more places where films are shown.
—-
Interviewer Matthew Toffolo is currently the CEO of the WILDsound FEEDBACK Film & Writing Festival. The festival that showcases 20-50 screenplay and story readings performed by professional actors every month. And the FEEDBACK Monthly Festival held in downtown Toronto, and Los Angeles at least 2 times a month. Go to www.wildsound.ca for more information and to submit your work to the festival.
| SUBMIT your TV PILOT Screenplay or TV SPEC Script Voted #1 TV Contest in North America. |
 SUBMIT your Short Screenplay or FEATURE ScriptFULL FEEDBACK on all entries. Get your script performed |
Festival Reviews 