Añade un argumento en tu idiomaA beautifully haunting tale of old friendships, lost love and saying goodbye.A beautifully haunting tale of old friendships, lost love and saying goodbye.A beautifully haunting tale of old friendships, lost love and saying goodbye.
Imágenes
Argumento
Reseña destacada
Have you ever heard someone tell a joke which goes on way too long, so long that you realize it has gone far beyond what any possible punch line could ever recover it from, which, of course, proves true as the punch line is a pun along the lines of; "I left my harp in Stan Frans disco". Well, Meeting Agnus is like that joke, but without a punch line. Apparently director Alexander Pappas misunderstood the meaning of the word "short" in the phrase "short film". This is a tortuously long short that conveys a simple idea that could be told in about 12 seconds. Pappas does it in 60 times that.
It would help if the film explained who was who and why they were doing it, but then you would have nothing to guess about and you would know immediately that it stinks. Perhaps I am too harsh on it, as it was fairly well made and acted. I don't want to be hard on Pappas, he does an excellent job in all other regards. In fact, it probably could have been a good short if it had something called... what's the word... notboringashell? But don't take my word for it, google the title and see for yourself.
When watching bad shorts my nagging question is always "why?" Why was all this effort and money used to make something so mundane, so pointless? It's not like making a crappy feature, that you can trick people into buying; you can't sell a short. It is made primarily for the director. And another thing, I don't know what it is about amateur filmmakers that make them think that people would be interested in everything little thing they do, rather than what they say, but their films are almost always too long with no point. It's like a musician that thinks that watching him set up his equipment is as enjoyable as the song he plays, both of which he does poorly. In that regard, this short plays like a 12 minute version of "Shave and a Haircut".
It would help if the film explained who was who and why they were doing it, but then you would have nothing to guess about and you would know immediately that it stinks. Perhaps I am too harsh on it, as it was fairly well made and acted. I don't want to be hard on Pappas, he does an excellent job in all other regards. In fact, it probably could have been a good short if it had something called... what's the word... notboringashell? But don't take my word for it, google the title and see for yourself.
When watching bad shorts my nagging question is always "why?" Why was all this effort and money used to make something so mundane, so pointless? It's not like making a crappy feature, that you can trick people into buying; you can't sell a short. It is made primarily for the director. And another thing, I don't know what it is about amateur filmmakers that make them think that people would be interested in everything little thing they do, rather than what they say, but their films are almost always too long with no point. It's like a musician that thinks that watching him set up his equipment is as enjoyable as the song he plays, both of which he does poorly. In that regard, this short plays like a 12 minute version of "Shave and a Haircut".
- RT Firefly
- 21 jun 2005
- Enlace permanente
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y añadir a tu lista para recibir recomendaciones personalizadas
Detalles
Contribuir a esta página
Sugerir un cambio o añadir el contenido que falta