Now this is a difficult one.
First of all it is by far one of the most ambitous and mature drama's attempted especially on these forums. I mean you have to give this film credit - how many of you guys have attempted marital fidelity - murder - grief - drug addiction - guilt and revenge all in one short film.
It is particularly ambitious for my friend Marshall who of course not only directed this film but wrote it too!
I desperately want to like this film for thsoe exact reasons but there are some crippling flaws in the way the cinematography shows us some characters, the acting and to a lesser extent the way we are told this effectively written story.
If we start with the music, the music is rather primitive (midi) based sound that does not lend us a strong impression I think of what is to come.
The acting of the drug addicted debter is satisfactory, he makes us relatively interested in his story (despite his overly delightful abode - he has a posh toilet for sure) Be assured audiences are incredibly picky for such details.
The attractive women (they are all delightful and yummy) take us to the next scenes. The blonde mother, rushes by her lines and while im sure she's trying her best - comes across a little unclear. The other girl does fine (in their scene together.) The shots also do not give much dramatic impetuous or introduction to her character. It's like she comes on mumbles quickly in profile and Whoosh she's gone!
The earnest chap playing her husband (and the delightful albeit redhaired baby!!! - she didn't have an affair with the flame headed milkman too did she
is a little weak, again rushing and mumbling lines (though he does much better with his earnest performance at the graveside.)
The scene with William Shatner (the blonde ladies lover) is one of the film's lowest points. The lover is far far FAR FAR too relaxed, and manages to gibbly say quite calmly 'i love you... i love you... i love you...) while murdering her (which is quite awkward and weakly choreographed.) It is a wonder that he manages to kill her at all!
The introduction of that character and their relationship is also quite an interesting potential tenet in the narrative - but it come's and goes (our main character it seems was that drug addicted guy from the start... but how interested are we in him!?)
The performance of the blonde girl's brother - the gangster, is competent enough, but his existence seems a little out of keeping with the film's environment of office workers and suburbia. In other words its not the mean streets of East End london - and while not explicity set in the Orkney's the narrative fails to develop a sense of time and place legitimate for this character to be banging on the door, demanding moeny armed with a gun!
The revelation scene where he finds his sisters picture and shoots the drug addict is fairly predictable - albeit we have dread building - it does seem fairly inevitable.
Again the cinematography bears the trademark of television mostly and for a low budget film this is not entirely what you want. Especially as there is ample opportunity to enhance the drama with some more creative cinematography. That said what we have is competent however! Again in that 4:3 ratio - it is a dead screen ratio!
So the bads are -
Narrative with missed opportunity
Poor Music
Very mixed performances
Predictable Ending
Sometimes unrealistic to the setting
Unoriginal Cinematography
The Goods are -
More ambitious than 99% of microbudget drama's
Competent Cinematography.
