Directed by Steve Desmond Written by Steve Desmond and Michael Sherman Starring Caitlin Carmichael, Ione Skye, Christopher Wiehl, Joey Luthman Short Film Review by Euan Franklin In a dark, well-furnished underground bunker, nine-year-old Jenn (Caitlin Carmichael) peruses a house-design catalogue – wondering what it’s like on the outside. Her family keep her locked inside to keep her safe from the “monsters”. But Jenn harbours a desire to escape. Despite the frightening descriptions from her brother Isaac (Joey Luthman), she unlocks the heavy metallic door while everyone’s gone and walks outside. She discovers that this world is far more complicated than she’d thought. Writer-Director Steve Desmond achieves what every short filmmaker dreams of doing: he squeezes a feature film into eleven minutes. This is no small task, and he executes every element perfectly. Each character is vivid, possessing clear and appealing idiosyncrasies that guide us through the story with our eyes stapled to the screen. Even the inconsequential father, Henry (Christopher Wiehl), presents a memorable, tough-American demeanour despite his regrettably limited screen time. But it is ultimately Caitlin Carmichael’s deep and multifaceted performance that drives our attention. Casting directors spend millions seeking that sort of talent from young actors, and Desmond was lucky to find her. Her character, Jenn, is more sensitive than other tough little girls in similar stories. Usually, these archetypes have to go through some traumatic experience that removes their innocence and makes them strong. With Jenn, she is strong but has no idea about the world outside, making her sensitive to harsh realities. She is forced to battle with her weaknesses and, as a result, her character is more human. The story is ferocious in its twists and turns, never leaving inconsiderate pauses that stunt the action. The thrill is in the mystery. Although Monsters is labelled as a horror, there’s nothing particularly frightening about it. But the fear is in not knowing, exactly, what’s going on. When events escalate, we feel like we have no control. We are scared because we don’t know what’s happening, but there’s also an overbearing curiosity to see what’s beyond the door – much like Jenn. In this respect, Monsters has echoes of Dan Trachtenberg’s 10 Cloverfield Lane in its crippling claustrophobia and lack of any clear answers. The issue with the short film is that, by the end, it feels like a well-designed pitch instead of a tightly knit short. Some of the narrative integrity is stripped away by the inconclusive climax, promising more chapters to the story. Desmond clearly made Monsters with an unsure intention of extending it into a feature film, which is probably why the slice is deliciously thick for eleven minutes. And stuck on the end is a superfluous credits sequence that, though superbly done, transparently rips off the Walking Dead titles. Long credit sequences in short films rarely work, so I can only guess it’s part of the pitch. But, the film is strong and exciting. Desmond possesses a remarkable grip on story and character, especially for a filmmaker with only two other shorts to his name (both made eleven years prior to Monsters). It could easily play as an extended trailer to a feature film, and I would be the first to go and watch it. And despite not feeling like a short film, I have no doubt that Monsters will lead onto bigger and better things. There’s no mystery there. Like watching short films online for Free? Check out the entire movie of Monsters below... #ShortFilmReviews #EuanFranklin #ShortFilms #Dystopianfilms #SteveDesmond #CaitlinCarmichael #IoneSkye #ChristopherWiehl #JoeyLuthman #WatchShortFilms

Filmmaker Interview by Andrew Young American filmmaker Phil Giordano has been garnering awards and attention for some time now. He was recently the recipient of the Hollywood Foreign Press Award and first prize at the NYU First Run Film Festival and is immensely proud of them, especially the latter award, which had been a long-term goal of his. This all comes from his compelling and compassionate short Supot. Following a young boy in the rural Philippines as he approaches the ritual of being circumcision, it is tender in its characters and beautiful in its images. Giordano brings an even hand to his subject matter to make the film both interesting and interested in the topic of “forced” circumcision. Currently working on advertisements in Singapore, Giordano found time to catch up with UK Film Review to talk about Supot, Trump and the future. UKFR: I guess a good place to start would just be, why Supot? For a fairly young filmmaker it’s quite an obscure topic compared to some of the things that I get sent. So why did you focus on this particular story? PG: I was doing my New York University Film School graduate thesis film and I really wanted to make a film about a father and a son, a kind of coming-of-age story about manhood, and my wife had told me – we were sitting at the kitchen table, we were in New York – and she was telling me about how her father never really got along with her younger brother until he got circumcised. How when he was younger she never really thought much of the brother, she never thought he was tough or anything and then after he got circumcised it was like a very big bonding time. After that he [the father] kind of respected him more and when I met them they got along really well, so it was interesting that [the circumcision] was the definitive thing. I did more research and I found that it really is like a rite of passage in the Philippines; circumcision is really when you become a man. UKFR: Do you feel that is the case in America as well? Because in the UK not as many people get circumcised, it’s not as big a thing, so it is less like a rite-of-passage, but do you think what happens in the Philippines does happen to a smaller extent in the US? PG: Well, the film screened really well there, people are really responsive to it. But, it’s definitely not, I think that’s why it screened so well, it’s totally different; people either don’t get it done or they get it done at birth. It is so different to them that it is really shocking and surprising. I think masculinity and manhood is huge in America for almost everyone, and dealing with their father (laughs) you know? I spoke to some American professors and people I had spoken to who are American and it is a very raw thing, I think almost everyone in America is super objective – to impress their father is a major thing and what resonates with them. UKFR: Do you feel that once you had discovered the extent of this in the Philippine that it was something you just had to tell? Did you feel compelled? Was it a story you thought couldn’t go untold and is there a reason you think this story hasn’t been told before? PG: (Pauses) I think in the Philippines it’s different for them than it is for foreigners. I think some people that watch the film from the Philippines are kind of not surprised by it and it’s very common, so for me it’s not a story that had to be told within that culture. But I think as a foreigner, as an outsider, it’s something that has to be told; from my perspective it has to be told. I took a lot of care for it [the film] to be authentic. My goal was always for it to be like you couldn’t tell if an outsider made or if someone from the Philippines made it and I hope that’s been achieved and I’ve been told it’s been achieved. UKFR: Yes, I think part of why that comes across, that you can’t necessarily that it’s an outsider that’s made it, is that it’s very understanding of a different culture. The film doesn’t judge the characters morally, it’s quite a morally ambiguous film. It lets the audience do a lot of the work in that sense, but did you feel when making the film that you had a duty to condemn the practice, or not condemn it? Did you have to wrestle with the morals of it yourself when making the film? PG: I tend to always be a little more objective when I talk about it, but actually I think it’s great. I think it is a really good thing. There is so much pride; when I was doing my interviews and my research, finding out about how it’s done and the people that have gone through it, everyone is really proud of what they’ve gone through. When I witnessed it, it really wasn’t like mutilation or inhumane. They’ve been doing it for so long that they’ve really perfected it – it’s not like other places in the world that are more savage, it really is a prideful thing. People think about it in a positive way. Having said that, there is a shot where we cut back to the boy and he’s not entirely happy, there is an uncertainty in him and I think I feel that way also. UKFR: Moving on more to the actual filming of it, you are making a film obviously somewhere that you didn’t grow up in with a language that you are not as used to, did you find that a bit of a challenge? Or was that something you were fairly comfortable with, the language barrier? PG: I love it. I love working in a language that I don’t speak because it makes you very diligent, it’s like a whole different process; it forces you to rehearse, it forces you to go over the dialogue in a unique way. The adult actors spoke Tagalog and English so I was able to, with the father, kind of re-write the dialogue a bit to make it more colloquial, more conversational. He would re-write some of the dialogue of the kids also, which was really nice. A lot of the dialogue was things I had heard, like people would say a phrase and I’d ask “what does that mean?” or “what did he just say?” and jot it down. I was always asking “how would you say this?” or “what’s this called?”. So, that’s in the writing of it and then in the directing of it it’s fabulous because you can kind of not care about the dialogue and just focus on the performance and what they’re giving to each other. In film school we had a professor that would say dialogue is like “blah blah”; it’s not really about what they’re saying, it’s about the meaning behind it, it’s more about the energy that they’re giving out. So for me it’s very freeing. UKFR: You speak about working with the actors and it’s interesting because Supot is a film that has fantastic performances in it from Andrei Fajarito and John Arcilla, but it’s also a film with brilliant locations and fantastic shots of nature in it. Do you as a director get more reward from capturing the visual beauty on camera or from the more human side of it and working with the actors. I know some directors think of themselves kind of as an “actor’s director” because they love creating performances with an actors or do you get more reward out of the visuals? Which for you is the more important part of filmmaking? PG: I mean it’s kind of a cop-out, because I enjoy both and for me…..this film honestly was a very different experience for me because I’ve made other films and other films, they can suck, or you can have trouble with things, or it’s less balanced, but for this film it was….I was directing commercials in Singapore that were very corporate and very uptight so to work with these kids that are non-actors, they’re just doing it – they’re just experiencing it and the professional actors are so natural and they bring so much experience, so I can kind of let them go and that was incredible, I loved it. Also, I love the landscapes and the sweeping shots; I care a lot about my cinematography so I can’t pick one over the other. UKFR: Quite recently you mentioned that you don’t intend to make films in America, other than perhaps for a very special story. Could you perhaps explain a bit why you don’t want to work in America? PG: Well I just read a script that takes place in the South in America that I love and I might purchase it. I can’t say that… UKFR: ….you can’t say you’ll never work there. But what is it that puts you off somewhat about America? PG: Well I am a bit of a hypocrite because I might make a movie there, a full-length movie, and me and another producer are developing an action short film, but for the most part – it’s not that I don’t like America, I am open to some projects, but what I love about South East Asia and specifically the Philippines is that you can do anything you want, people are so open to supporting you. I could do anything I wanted, like the whole town was open to me, I could shoot in any house, they are so hospitable. I could shoot in any house I wanted, I wanted a horse, I said “hey, get me a horse” and they got me a horse in five minutes, I set things on fire, I created smoke. There’s this one shot, you can’t really see it, but the camera had to dive through this person’s front yard and there was a bush in the way, and they let us cut down the bush. You can’t do stuff like that in other places, you know. There is so much richness and culture and openness that’s there. Just to set something on fire in America you need a fire marshal, you know? I don’t mean setting a house on fire, just something basic. Or if you want a horse or animals, you need animal wranglers; there’s just something very pure about how it is in the Philippines. UKFR: And obviously in Singapore now, do you feel that Singapore is a good place to make films as well? Is it a nice base to have? Why have you chosen to settle there? PG: Last year there were two feature films that went to Cannes from Singapore, so they are finding their way; they are finding success here, but I think it’s hard to make a really good feature film in Singapore. A few years ago another film won the Camera d’Or at Cannes, it was a Singaporean film, but I think they are the exceptions. It is very difficult and doesn’t happen as much. I live here because I direct commercials here and it’s very high-paying. So I am able to pay my rent and live comfortably and I love it here – I love the people, I love the food, I love the travelling. UKFR: With everything that’s going on in America politically, obviously we have entered the Trump era, it is a time of quite turbulent politics. Do you ever feel that is a reason to stay away from America in terms of making films? Or do you feel it is almost a reason to go back, because this is such an interesting time in America’s history, the kind of time where you would like to “film your response” to what’s going on? PG: It’s complicated because I do have a story I want to do there, but I could live the rest of my life and never go back to America. Honestly, it’s such an aggressive place. It’s such an insulated country; there are great people, but other people there is such a strong, not nationalism, (pauses) nativism there. Certain people don’t like any foreigners, I mean we are all foreigners. So, honestly I really could live my whole life and never go back, aside from my close friends and my family – that’s the only thing that keeps me going there. There’s such a big world, you know? There’s so many places I want to go. UKFR: So obviously you’ve studied in America; you’ve grown up in America; you’ve worked in the Philippines; you’ve been in France recently, I think, as well; you live in Singapore. Is the travelling something you like about this job, as a director? Is traveling for meetings something that really appeals to you, is that one of the bits you love about the job? PG: Yeah, I mean it’s great. A friend of mine from Nepal, he made a great film and he’s been to I think 29 different festivals, for free. They’ve flown him and put him up in a hotel. I’ve been lucky enough to….it’s really nice when a festival will pay for your flight and your hotel, to send you somewhere. I’ve been to Korea; I’ve been to America; I’ve been to France, all from them bringing me, which is incredible. And then I’ve been to Nepal and a few other countries to attend festivals. It’s unreal. You also get to travel around when you’re there and meet people. It’s awesome (laughs) yeah I love it. UKFR: What’s your favourite place? Your favourite place you’ve worked, or you’ve had a meeting, or visited when travelling and thought “I really want to make a film here” or “I could live here”? PG: Nepal. When I went to Nepal I was blown away. It is a really unique place. To see Kathmandu is amazing, the mountain range is incredible. There’s so many talented people there. South Asia and South-East Asia they are regions that right now are booming, it’s like the Golden Age. The history is emerging just now and it’s amazing, I can’t believe I’m witnessing it. They’re getting their first film at Venice, their first film at these major festivals and it’s happening right before your eyes. The equipment is so inexpensive, the crew is so talented. It’s crazy, a film wins best cinematography at Sundance from Nepal, a short film, and…. UKFR: …it’s great to be a part of it. PG: Yeah. And nobody knows about it. You feel like you’re in on a secret. In the Philippines it’s more established and there’s talented independent directors, there’s so many. We had 8 Filipino films at Busan. It’s the biggest festival in Asia and there were Filipino films. So it is great to be around at this time. UKFR: More on to you as a filmmaker and where you’re headed. You’re in Singapore and you’re making a lot of commercials and like you say, it’s quite a profitable thing to do. Do you feel the desire to try and get away from that? As you mentioned, the safe, corporate nature of it, to try to get away from that and make something for you artistically as a director. PG: People have a very negative view of commercials but I’m very grateful. It’s why I can pay my rent. It’s why I can be a man to my wife. Otherwise I couldn’t…my wife has a good job and she does her half and I have to be a man and do my half and without that I wouldn’t be able to. I am developing my first feature film, it takes place in Manila, it’s about underground gambling for pool. There’s this whole unbelievable ecosystem of script in America also. So I do do my career stuff also. I am very lucky, I have my free time also. UKFR: Is there someone creatively that you admire that you would eventually in your career like to emulate? PG: (Laughs) well of course, I’m not a trailblazer. I would like to make commercials; there is this guy called Martin Dethurah, he’s this Danish commercial director. They don’t feel like commercials, they’re films. It’s astonishing that he can get paid to put a brand on these things. They are unbelievable, they are touching and emotional and they are longer, 2 or 3 minutes, sometimes they’re 5 minutes. Then as a filmmaker I love Paul Thomas Anderson. If I could have a career like Paul Thomas Anderson I don’t know what I would do (laughs). UKFR: At UK Film Review we tend to focus on short films and most of what I have written is on short films. I am quite interest in the idea of the short film as an art form. As somebody who had quite a lot of success with Supot, which is of course a short film, do you feel that short films are sometimes seen too much as just a stepping stone to features, the same for commercials really. Do you think shorts and commercials are an art form in their own right. PG: That’s a very tricky question. I have a very specific opinion about this. When I say this I don’t mean to offend anyone or belittle anyone because we all have our different paths and our different opinions and different perspectives on the world. I personally really do feel like I wouldn’t be satisfied only making short films. I am trying to make my first feature film now, but I really do feel like most people make shorts to get to the features, or for practice, to to show someone that they’re ready. I can’t really understand…there are people that I do respect who make really good animated short films, or narrative short films, or documentary short films. They’re happy, they’re content, they’ve made like 5 short films that have showed at Toronto or Sundance, they’ve been to a 100 festivals, but, for me, I grew up on feature films. I don’t understand how you can keep making short films, for me it’s not what I’m interested in, I can’t really understand it. And I don’t think you should make a short film to try and make money or have the hopes of it making a big splash in the world. I think it does happen; commissioned short films are a whole different thing, if Louis Vuitton commissions you to make a short film, or BMW, or whoever it may be. For me, I would rather, not that I would ever do an art installation, but I feel that an art installation is more of like a work of art than a short film. Some short films, they’re really successful, but a lot of the really successful ones, they have a big hook at the end or a big surprise. For me I’m always interested in being taken to a different world, show immense craft. My favourite shorts aren’t like clever shorts, where you go, “Oh that’s a clever short,” it’s something that, “Wow! That should be a feature film.” UKFR: What’s next? What are you working on at the moment? And after that – you say you won’t be satisfied just making short films – when will you be satisfied? When will you think, “I’ve reached my peak as a filmmaker”? Or do you not think you have a limit? Is the sky the limit or do you have a set goal? PG: Yeah I do. The film I’m developing is about billiards and I met several world champions and I said, “Are you happy now?” and they’re never satisfied. They’re the best player in the entire world and it makes them more insecure because they feel they have to prove to everyone that they deserve what they achieved. But I think if I win the Golden Palm at the Cannes Film Festival and then after that I make a film that wins Best Director or Best Picture, I think I’ll be happy. I can sit back and just…I’ll still make films but…I think I’ll be fine (laughs). UKFR: More immediately, what is your next project, what are you working on at the moment? PG: I’m developing a film in the Philippines about underground gambling in Manila, about back-alley pool halls and I might begin developing a project in America, a feature film, in the South. For now I’m directing a commercial for Listerine in Singapore (laughs). #FilmmakerInterviews #FilmFeatures #AndrewYoung #PhilGiordano #Interviews #Filmmaking

Directed by Stanislava Buevich Starring Joanna Kate Rodgers, Faye Sewell, Nitin Ranpuria, James Arthur Daniels Short Film Review by Rachel Pullen We have all been there, stuck in a workspace with a co worker who is so annoying that you would do anything to get rid of them, but would that anything be murder? Well that of course depends on your anger levels as well as your self control, all of which stop the vast majority of the general public from stabbing anyone who cuts them up in traffic, jumps a queue or just lacks general manners, god knows I have wanted to on many past occasions. Stanislava Buevich’s short piece Self-Control is a study of that, we follow Lilly [played by Joanna Kate Rodgers] who has unfortunately found herself as the friend of an annoying co worker, [played by Faye Sewell] and has to work hard to resist the over whelming desire she has to murder her. Buevich uses a comedic approach on many levels in this film, the annoying actions of Lily’s co worker can only be described as laughable as can the murderous desires of Lily, be it from strangulation to poison, all of which are acted out in our leading lady's day dreams. What’s not laughable is the performances from all the cast in this short, all of which are cast brilliantly, bringing their own spin to this black comedy, this is especially apparent in the number of scenes we see between Rodgers and Nitin Ranpuria, as she desperately tries to get him to take her desire to kill seriously as he sips brightly-coloured milkshakes in a childlike fashion. Buevich’s real credit though is the interesting use of angels and shot set ups; we see an abundance of wide shots, allowing for a lot of headroom, visual background noise and shadow play, lighting our lead role’s face often from below to enhance her demon-like tendencies throughout the comedic scenes. Self-Control screams of that classic style of horror that has been missing from the genre since the success of ..well Scream, a black comedy with charm and style, with relatable and intelligent characters who not only have a level of realism to them but who can make the audience feel right there with them as they battle their demons. Self-Control dishes up laughs, suspense and an ending that will have you asking more questions than you started off with. #ShortFilmReviews #ShortFilms #RachelPullen #StanislavaBuevich #JoannaKateRodgers #FayeSewell #NitinRanpuria #JamesArthurDaniels

★★★ Directed by Josh Mitchell Starring Josh Mitchell, Vanja Kapetanovic, Jesse O’Niell, Josh Thrower Indie Film Review by Taryll Baker What started out as a really fun and well-written comedy/drama, gradually turned into an unpleasantly cheesy mess. John Mitchell’s Wine Tasting was a promising concept and had me locked in from the first few scenes. It features a likeable bond between four friends, all preparing for a wine tasting exam. It was a really nice and entertaining film, but then the aftertaste kicked in. It becomes bland in story and characters. The actors no longer held my interest as they had before. The four leads are all wonderful actors, highlighting Josh Mitchell and Jesse O’Niell, but the writing becomes lacklustre and underwhelming, thus creating a rather awkward atmosphere. That said, the film itself has a great diegesis and seems visually inspired throughout. It’s captured well by cinematographer Nathan Gregory, so although a weakness in writing is present, the soft, subtle visual storytelling is pleasing to the eye. As aforementioned, the screenplay is a mess. It feels like scenes have been picked from the cutting room floor and placed in any nook and cranny possible, without any true meaning. The overarching story is of course lurking, but the way in which these scenes are placed feels slightly jarring. The final act, leading into the final scene is also a little adventurous. The ending itself left me feeling empty; a better direction is visible, but it never heads there. I would have preferred the story revolving around the four guys working towards earning their exam passes and wrapping it there. I suppose that’s where Wine Tasting strives to be different. It ventures past that success as we witness the lives of the characters changing. It works, but personally, I found it to be a little too ambitious. The soundtrack is great. Compiling a handful of talented composers with an Italian-eqsue tone, providing a delightfully upbeat personality as the film progresses. Unfortunately, it doesn’t cover up the imperfections in the audio recording. There are moments where you can clearly see a dubbing has taken place, which is of course a big part of any film’s post-production stage, however it should look and feel as natural as possible and not as half-hearted. Wine Tasting has a wonderful first 40 minutes, but struggles to continue the story past that. It’s an entertaining picture that culminates with a bitter and unrewarding end. #IndieFilmReviews #IndieFilms #TaryllBaker #JoshMitchell #JesseO39Niell #JoshThrower #VanjaKapetanovic

Directed by Richard Earl Staring Nadia Cameron-Blakley, Denys Gaskill, Louis Mattey and Edward Scott Short Film Review by Daniel Reason Spring Clean is directed by Richard Earl, written by James Browning and is a short film that is based around the removal of a “plum tree”. Linda Smith, who is played by Nadia Cameron-Blakley, is persistently harassed by her neighbour, Delia, played by Denys Gaskill, as she wants Linda to cut down a plum tree in her garden, and it becomes quite clear that the harassment that she has received has affected her greatly. Simply by reading that plot synopsis, it can be quite difficult to know what tone this film is supposed to be. This is, perhaps, the biggest issue with Spring Clean as at times it seems very serious, due to the music and directing of Earl, but in other moments it is quite comical, although this isn’t clear if it’s intentional comedy or not. There are some similarities in tone to Mary Harron’s black comedy American Psycho (2000), even the final shot of the film, which shows Linda pulling quite a sinister smile to the camera is similar, is something that we’d expect from Christian Bale’s character, Patrick Bateman, in that film. It is Marjane Satrapi’s 2014 film The Voices, however, where Spring Clean shares the most similarities. Both films feature a seemingly normal protagonist, but someone who is heavily influenced by the people around them, and both films are presented in a bright setting, with some comedic moments. Unlike The Voices, which does have a clear tone and direction, it is hard to know if this film means for certain moments to be comedic or not, and if it wants to be a dark thriller or black comedy. Another factor of the film that causes some tonal issues is through the acting and dialogue, or way that it is delivered. While Cameron-Blakley’s performance is quite mysterious, and is able to show a clear range of emotion, the other two characters seem to be in another film genre entirely. Louis Mattey plays Raymond Jones, the son of Denys Gaskill’s character, who is a young boy scout that is eager to help Linda with the plum tree problem. His portrayal of the character is very happy and gullible, and his experience in acting, or lack thereof, is quite obvious. It is Denys Gaskill’scharacter, however, who provides the most questions about the tone of the film. She seems very over the top in her dialogue/movement and some of the line delivery is too fast, which doesn’t match with the serious elements of the film. It is Spring Clean's very short run time that, despite it’s flaws, makes the film flow very well. It is edited well, by Stephane Tin, so the roughly 3 minutes 40 seconds go around incredibly quickly. It is because of this, that it allows you to watch the film multiple times and try to understand more about it. However, the clash of tones and some poor acting prevent the film from being as memorable as it could have been. #ShortFilmReviews #ShortFilms #DanielReason #BlackComedy #RichardEarl #NadiaCameronBlakley #DenysGaskill #LouisMattey #EdwardScott

Directed by Justin Ehlers, Nathan Lawrence Starring Justin Ehlers, Kim Gonzales Short Film Review by Andrew Galvin Sinking directors Justin Ehlers and Nathan Lawrence might argue until they are blue in the face that they have made a short film, but they have not. At just a shade over three minutes and with a whole song playing through its duration, it’s a music video. And there’s nothing wrong with that; brilliant filmmakers such as Jonathan Glazer, Edgar Wright and David Fincher all worked within the format, after all (we’ll ignore that this was also the starting point for McG and Michael Bay). There’s a decent idea at the heart of Sinking too, albeit one that we’ve seen in some form previously. We start with a man in a bathtub attempting suicide, and from there we work backwards to see what has brought him to that point. Essentially, it’s Coldplay’s The Scientist video (directed by Jamie Thraves) but set in a claustrophobic flat and lacking a big old car crash. Backwards narratives can work in a longer form, despite the inherent difficulty of being all timey-wimey, as shown by Christopher Nolan in Memento. And in fact, the extra time that a feature allows, helps us to be more emotionally invested in the characters, which is where the problems with Sinking begin. It’s far, far too short—there’s no time to get to know the personalities of the two lead characters, the ins-and-outs of their relationship and what makes them tick. Of course, subtlety and inference play an important role in connecting us to characters; but having none of these things in the three minutes means what should be an emotional gut punch of a finale is totally lost. The song that plays over the top, by Blind Horse, lacks the emotional weight that could have lifted the short above its form. It stands as a valiant effort, however. It might lack the technical expertise that saw Chris Martin learning to lip-sync in reverse for The Scientist, but its ambition should be praised. The backwards filming is well filmed, and there are hints at the chemistry between the two leads, although this is not fully explored. All the problems with Sinking come back to its length: perhaps just doubling the film to six minutes would have given us more of a link to the characters. In the end, this is a missed opportunity. #ShortFilmReviews #MusicVideos #AndrewGalvin #JustinEhlers #NathanLawrence #KimGonzales

Directed by Stanislava Buevich Starring Lucy Bailey Short Film Review By Michael Fiott Stanislava Buevich writes and directs this short film, Book vs an Antiquarian, that proves to be more of a treat for the eyes then it is for our wish for desirable storytelling given the confines of its short length. It begins with the titular antiquarian sprucing up her library of ancient antiques and books when she suddenly hears the cry of a woman in need. Understandably she is intrigued by this and discovers the source of the noise is coming from one of her oldest books, which she then attempts to forcefully open to a rather mystical outcome. What must be stated about Book vs an Antiquarian first and foremost is its absolutely wonderful set. Everything on display completely shows Buevich’s vision from the odd taxidermy models to the rich red’s used throughout that. Whilst this is the most obvious use in the colour palette the editing and colour correction makes excellent use of blues and purples to create a genuinely warm and saturated feeling through its length. It is also very confined which makes the camera a slave to using close ups for the most part which results in us picking up on even the most minute detail; from the skeletal models and diagrams to even the smallest case of seashells, there is always something interesting for the audience to look at, which is incredibly impressive for the amount of effort and dedication. Unlike the use of colour of verbose setting, the dialogue is very much scarce in this piece which is not to its detriment as its plot only needed the key word of “help” for it to kick start, we are also guided by the modest performance of Lucy Bailey whose facial expressions served well to communicate her confusion about the whole situation. The quirky and lackadaisical beat from the music also invites us into its underlying comedic tone. With all of these positives comes the most irksome quality to the film which does hamper the audience's overall enjoyment, the lack of depth in the plot. After all of the events take place there is a general conclusion that the audience understandably feels of underwhelming confusion and listlessness. This can be cured by a number of things, mainly the length of the film, there is truly not enough time given in the build-up for it to justify its cryptic ending, which is a true shame given the potential it would have had as a lighthearted and quirky comedy. #ShortFilmReviews #ShortFilms #MichaelFiott #StanislavaBuevich #LucyBailey

Directed by Aaron Dunleavy Cinematography by Christopher Spurdens Short Film Review by Euan Franklin It’s a nightmarish idea: what if the children reigned? What if they overthrew the oppressive grown-ups and started a new society, one that is true to their primal instincts? After successfully delving into Northern social realism with The Truants and Throw Me to the Dogs, also starring unruly children, writer-director Aaron Dunleavy moves into post-apocalyptic territory with Strays. The film opens with children throwing stones at an adult in chains. Cut to two kids trapping a bird to eat. Then cut to a group of boys queue to have sex with a young girl. Strays, only three-and-a-half minutes in length, continues in this approach: harrowing images showing the downfall of a parentless dystopia. There is no one story, only a glimpse into a bleak future. The film has poetry rather than plot – pursuing a stream-of-consciousness rhythm instead of a story-driven narrative. Alike to Dunleavy’s previous shorts, Strays tells us how violent kids can be. Without the order and empathy instilled by their parents, children return to their animalistic urges. It’s something many don’t like to think about – children are often held up as the prime example of innocence. How could something so young and so small be capable of such evil? It’s a fear that’s been a part of British culture since The Lord of the Flies was published in 1954. What if children were left to fend for themselves in a lawless society? Despite the short length, Dunleavy poses these questions with a gloomy confidence – remarkable for a director just out of film school. However, the film’s poetic plotlessness doesn’t always work. We’re only given a montage of snapshots without a narrative thread to tie them up. The world is not as engaging as it could’ve been and it’s a wonder why Dunleavy didn’t pursue a similar route to his other shorts. As with Strays, they also follow children in a distressing environment - showing their mettle in whatever way possible. But The Truants and Throw Me to the Dogs have a depth of humanity and character, similar to Shane Meadows in its execution. Surely a post-apocalyptic setting would encourage a similar story to take place? Christopher Spurdens’ cinematography is beautifully dirty. The visuals create a sordid atmosphere of a world where emotion is a hindrance rather than a moral necessity. If anything supports Dunleavy to structure a short film in such a scattered way, it is the meticulous craftsmanship of every little scene. Its brevity has allowed him and Spurdens the freedom to shoot with a gritty precision as well as draw out haunting performances from the child actors. The images reminded me of Colin Watkinson’s work on The Handmaid’s Tale in its sombre depictions of a dismantled society – and I wouldn’t be surprised if, later in his career, Spurdens were to match his style. Strays feels like an arresting experiment, testing the waters of an underdeveloped idea. Dunleavy has created a frightening world with primitive, parentless youngsters who have thrown away all sense of morality – echoing the evil children in Narciso Serrador’s horror film Who Can Kill A Child? The lack of story in Strays puts off another viewing, but I’m hanging on to the possibility that it’s a prologue to a bigger project – one closer to the coexistent cruelty and humanity shown in his earlier films. I look forward to it. Let’s hope the kids don’t get any ideas in the meantime. #ShortFilmReviews #EuanFranklin #ShortFilms #Dystopianfilms #ExperimentalCinema #AaronDunleavy

Film Feature by Seamus Conlon It is the question we ask ourselves (almost) every day...if the end was nigh, which movies that have been stacked up next to the widescreen would I finally make time for? Film critic Seamus Conlon gives us his run down of the 10 Films to See Before You Die... Sunrise (1927) The best of all silent films is a love story of such visual invention as to feel avant-garde even today. A nameless husband is seduced from rural life by the temptation of a city woman, and the odyssey is as much of style as of place. Ugetsu (1953) In both form and content, Ugetsu is one of the less aggressive, less challenging films on this list, but no less distinct in its vision. The gliding, circumspect tracking shots invest the simple ghost story with real stylistic majesty, never becoming grotesquely virtuosic but still imprinting certain scenes in our memory. Persona (1966) Personae melt into one another as nurse (Bibi Andersson) treats mute actress (Liv Ullmann) as a blank screen upon which to project her identity. Few films have used images so convincingly to dramatise psychological strife. 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) The alpha and the omega of what cinema can do. The opening demonstrates the power of cinema as a wordless visual language - Kubrick represents the birth of technology by intercutting the death of an animal with an ape toying with the bones of a carcass. By the end of the film we’ve moved beyond the confines of mimetic art and into something like the cinematic equivalent of an abstract expressionist painting. If you only see one film before you die, see this. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) This film is often inaccurately described as having a ‘documentary realism’ style. The slasher is remarkable not for its graphic violence, of which there is little, but its in-your-face artifice: the restlessly kinetic camerawork and surreal sound design are visceral enough to persuade the viewer that they’ve experienced real mayhem. Eraserhead (1977) The questions of whether or not the deformed lady in the radiator lives inside Henry’s dreams or on a higher, impersonal level of reality, of whether the mutant baby is a metaphor or a real biological tragedy, are ultimately irrelevant to this unrelentingly original masterpiece, whose sublimity exists in its power to exploit the subconscious rather than exercise the cerebral mind. Natural Born Killers (1994) As a moralistic satire of the way in media fetishize violence, Natural Born Killers is fairly hollow, its performances deliberate caricatures. But Stone manipulates perspective and perception with such audacity, interweaves present, memory and imagination to such hallucinatory effect that we end up with something akin to Cubist cinema, and something that unwittingly gives its violence exhilarating beauty. Satantango (1994) This one’s seven hours long and therefore effectively 3-4 films for the price of one, bumping us up to 12.5 films to see before you die. Beyond that bargain, Satantango’s still a necessary watch; despite being a thoroughly unphantasmagorical documentation of social malaise in an isolated village in the late USSR, it seems to operate wholly in a dream world. Shame (2011) Sex addiction should lend itself to novelistic treatment more than film, since it is an invisible and psychological horror. But between them Steve McQueen and Michael Fassbinder overshadow Bruce the shark by making an almost imperceptible addiction the most menacing of all unseen cinematic villains. Under The Skin (2013) What’s so impressive about Under The Skin is not its self-consciously mind-melting passages, whose psychedelia and surrealism had already been perfected by films earlier on in this list, but by the way it vacillates between these passages and real scenes of Glasgow life. The film combines unstaged, documentarian footage with baffling abstraction to such an extent that we question if the film is even fiction, or something beyond narrative illusion. #FilmFeatures #Filmmaking #SeamusConlon #TopFilms #Filmmakers

Directed by Stanislava Buevich Starring Tallulah Sheffield, William Ludwig, John Bulleid, and Tamarin McGinley Short Film Review by Evie Brudenall Loo. A horrifyingly dark and funny two and a half minute short from the mind of Stanislava Buevich – a budding filmmaker with a unique, albeit warped, vision. A date should be filled with many things, such as romantically charged moments, mood-setting candle light and tantalising dishes. However, a date should not include the uncertainty of whether or not your partner will return from their trip to the toilet. The attractive couple engage in flirtatious banter – chemistry is clearly fizzling and a next date is definitely on the cards. Perhaps even the development of a relationship is possible. The unnamed woman (Tallulah Sheffield) excuses herself from the table to powder her nose, but her brief moment of reprieve is interrupted by an intensely upset woman in the cubicle next door. Sheffield’s performance and reactions to the hysterical restaurant-goer are wonderfully comedic and naturalistic as she can’t help but snigger at the dramatic nose-blowing but still shows curious concern. However, as the woman’s hearty sobs cease, Sheffield’s character goes to investigate and finds the toilet overflowing with water – but the cubicle is empty. She leaves the clinically white-tiled bathroom and returns to the dining area which boasts a warm and mood-lit scene thanks to the impeccable lighting design and cinematography. The changing visual landscape, along with the shifting tone, is acutely controlled and Buevich makes the most of the tight running time. Shocking and bizarre, Loo has a reveal that is both satisfying and repulsive in equal measure. It’s short, but definitely not sweet. #ShortFilmReviews #ShortFilms #Comedy #EvieBrudenall #Filmmaker #StanislavaBuevich #TallulahSheffield #WilliamLudwig #JohnBulleid #TamarinMcGinley

Filmmaker Feature by Chris Olson At UK Film Review, I have been lucky enough to interview some of the most exciting filmmakers in the industry right now. Another member of that club is composer Ros Gilman, a true artist and genuinely lovely man. I caught up with him to discuss his process, his most recent project Johanne, and what he would say if he were a dolphin... Watch Ros Gilman in action, conducting an orchestral recording session. Ros, earlier this year you finished work on the, now award-winning, animated short film Johanne, by director Anna-Ester Volozh. For those who haven't seen it yet, could you briefly sum up what the film is about?​ Sure! The film tells the story of Johanne, a heroine inspired by Joan of Arc. Johanne is the protector of an impeccably charming, small seaside town. The film follows a day in her life and – in the remarkably short span of only four minutes – takes us from village idyll to an enchanted sky battle. As a film composer, what did you enjoy most about this project? Quite a few things actually. Primarily, I just love animation. When Anna first showed me the film, I immediately fell in love with the beautiful animations, as well as the magical story. I knew, there and then, that I wanted to score it. Secondly, working with Anna was a great pleasure. She has a deep knowledge and understanding of music. She knew exactly what she wanted. We were in touch, almost on a daily basis, discussing various aspects of the score, as I was writing it. Finally, I feel rather fortunate to have been able to work with the outstanding musicians of FAME’S Macedonian Symphonic Orchestra [whose credits include major TV series’ such as The Affair, and Hannibal]. I flew out to Skopje to conduct the recording and supervise the mixing session. Once back in London, we added the final touches to the soundtrack. Parliamentary Jazz Award’s 2016 ‘Vocalist of the Year’, Emilia Martensson, provided the wonderful vocals, bringing everything together, quite perfectly. I'd like to use this opportunity to thank Anna, simply for making all this possible. What would you say was the toughest part of writing the music for Johanne? Hmmm…that would probably be the project’s short turnaround. We wanted to meet a crucial deadline. Between composing, orchestrating, programming the demo, preparing the parts, practising the conductor’s score, organising musicians, reaching out to recording venues, and sorting out contracts, well, shall we just say the nights were pretty short! But, then again, when isn’t this the case in the film industry! True…Would you mind telling us a little bit about how you actually got into music? Yes, of course. My parents are both professional musicians; my mum is a violinist, and my dad taught music theory at a university in Moscow. You could say that my relationship with music was born in the cradle. I started playing piano and violin at age three. By the time I had hit my early twenties, I was lucky enough to have performed across three continents, making multiple appearances on national TV and radio, eventually becoming the second leader of the European Philharmonic Orchestra. Sadly, a sudden hand-injury forced me to give up my violin career. No longer being able to perform, I was faced with the choice of either leaving music behind or somehow finding a way to continue with my passion. Ultimately, I fought my way back into music – reinventing myself as a composer, conductor and music producer. Phenomenal! What projects are you working on next? I am currently composing the score for a prime-time feature documentary for French Public Television channel, France 5. It is an exciting but rather dark film about the fate of young children, who are returning to Europe from a war-torn Syria and Iraq. Beyond that, I am also working on the release of my debut EP, Fantasies. The song sits within an exciting new crossover genre, which I have dubbed ‘Cinematic Pop’ – a blend of big screen drama with a catchy chart feel. If all goes as planned, the release will be in late 2017, so do stay tuned! Sounds exciting. Any advice for those who are just getting started with composing music for films? I suppose everyone's journey is different. Try not to compare yourself to others, who might already be further down their career path. Rather focus on yourself, see where your strengths and weaknesses lie. Work to advance your artistry. That may involve learning something new, perhaps shadowing someone a little more experienced, even exploring other avenues to find a solution. Perfecting our art is one of the great aspects of our journeys as creatives. What would you say if you were a dolphin? Ha! A dolphin... tricky question! I have read somewhere that dolphins supposedly sing to their calves. So I guess, on that basis, being a musician and composer, I would probably sing rather than speak. As a dolphin, this would be a great way to express myself! Watch Ros Gilman in action below with a special video on mixing an orchestral soundtrack... #FilmmakerInterviews #Interviews #ChrisOlson #RosGilman #FilmmakingCourses #Filmmaking #Composing

★★★★★ Written and Directed by David Lowery Starring Casey Affleck and Rooney Mara Film Review by Hannah Sayer A Ghost Story marks an exciting reunion for Ain’t Them Bodies Saints director David Lowery and actors Rooney Mara and Casey Affleck. Lowery explored the lyrical and the evocative in Ain’t Them Bodies Saints and these ideas are developed to become deeper and more profound in A Ghost Story, as the meaning as to why we’re all here is explored. The narrative follows a relationship that transcends time and the film becomes a reflective meditation on grief and loss. Before A Ghost Story premiered at the Sundance Film Festival earlier this year, A24 had already acquired the anticipated film’s rights. The film was shot in Texas in secret and made from funds acquired from Lowery’s previous film, the summer blockbuster Pete’s Dragon. From big budget box office success to indie experimental drama, Lowery is showcasing his range across the medium of filmmaking and is living proof that the independent film scene is still thriving. A Ghost Story opens with a quote from Virginia Woolf’s short story ‘Haunted House’: “Whatever hour you woke, there was a door shutting.” It is important, however, not to expect a horror film from this cinematic experience. A Ghost Story is arguably more intelligent than the average horror film; it is about a haunting but it is also about the people who live through this experience and their emotions. The end result is far from scary but it’s the ambiguity and the enormity of the subject matter which challenges the viewer’s expectations of what a ghost story can be. The viewer doesn’t learn the names of the characters in the film yet the credits inform us that Casey Affleck is playing C and Rooney Mara is M. A Ghost Story follows this couple as they move into a new home and the introduction to the story leads the viewer to believe they are about to witness a traditional haunted house ghost story, as the couple are awoken in the night when they hear their piano being played. The viewer then observes, like voyeurs in a way which is mirrored through the ghost becoming a voyeur later on in the film, the couple’s relationship up to the quietly climactic moment when C dies in a car crash off screen. C then returns as a ghost in search of his love and there is little explanation given as to why or how the ghost appears. We only see the ghost interacting when it is with another ghost in the house next door and M is unable to see the ghost. When the ghost appears, it begins to watch M mourning and the space inhabits the unimaginable grief and loss. Over time, M moves out of the house and moves on from the tragedy while the ghost of C is left behind waiting for her to return. More ensues, but it is more worthwhile knowing as little as possible about what is left to unfold. Lowery succeeds in making the audience curious witnesses to the tragedy as we continue waiting to find out what and why this has happened. The running time of the film is just short of 90 minutes subject matter feels enormous and the weight of its haunting nature is astonishing. The chemistry between Rooney Mara and Casey Affleck is wonderful in the opening scenes of the film and it is undeniably a treat to see these actors on screen together. Casey previously perfected the role of a man in devastating circumstances in his Academy Award winning performance in Manchester by the Sea and he continues this trend with his performance as the lonely ghost unable to connect with his love. His role in A Ghost Story is surreal in that it should be comedically absurd and it shouldn’t work, yet the ghost transcends merely being Casey Affleck wearing a sheet to become a living presence and a character that the viewer begins to feel for and sympathise with. The breathtaking shots captured by cinematographer Andrew Droz Palermo are effective in establishing the dreamy aesthetic of the piece. The quietness of the landscape is captured, with the cinematography feeling alive even when the setting and overall tone of the film is muted. The film is shot in an intimate 4:3 aspect ratio which is nearly square in its overall effect and it’s shot at a distance, apart from some important close up shots. The moments when close ups are used are memorable, in particular a moment where Rooney listens to music and the camera lingers on a face as she takes it all in. Nearly a whole four minutes is spent on a single scene where Rooney’s character eats a whole pie and these minute moments allow for the film to hone in effectively on moments of grief. The shot lingers as the ghost watches her eat the pie from the corner of the room and the atmosphere evoked from her not knowing that the ghost is watching is chilling. A Ghost Story is unlike any other cinematic experience to be had this summer. It is inventive, unique and contemplative and its release couldn’t be more timely in a summer filled with rehashed franchises and blockbusters. A Ghost Story is nothing short of Lowery’s masterpiece. A Ghost Story is released in cinemas on 11th August. #FilmReviews #TheatricalReleases #HannahSayer #DavidLowery #CaseyAffleck #RooneyMara #SundanceFilmFestival #FilmFestivals