28th ifva Open Category Jury Meeting Transcript
Jury Members ： Chan Chi-wa Ernest (Chan), Ahong Cheung (Cheung), Law Tsin-fungAngela (Law), Mak Hei-yan Heiward (Mak), Wong Chun (Wong)
Organizer representative： Kattie Fan (Fan), Sandy Lai, Anson Yip, Vanessa Ying

Fan:

Today, our goal is to select awards from these ten works, including a Gold Award,
a Silver Award and a Special Mention. We can discuss each work first before
moving on to nominating awards. If you don’t have any further questions, we canbegin with the first work, Lucky Cat.

Chan:

I was very impressed by this short film. When I first watched it, I didn't know thatthe work was related to Fruit Chan, but as I was watching it, I could sense a strong
Fruit Chan style. It turned out that Chan was the producer and advisor of this shortfilm. The performance of the actors is impressive, especially the two heroines,
whose performances add a lot to the work. The handling of those black comedy
touches is also good. All in all, the work is completely successful in terms oftechnique. The only flaw is that the last scene of the film is a bit blunt, that is, thescene where the protagonist enters the lucky cat. I understand that since thedirector uses the symbol of the Buddha statue mountain and the lucky cat, they
have to echo the beginning at the end, but it is a bit too blunt.

Wong:

I also like this work very much, and I have seen this film at the Director's Guild. I
think it's quite free, although I think it could be a little crazier. Compared withother narrative works, it is better in terms of style, film language, and even theconstruction of the world within the film. Although the production is not too fineand the budget is not high, you can see that the director has solid and ingenious
ideas, which are not easy to achieve. Other works may have beautiful images andhigh production values, but they lack their own distinctive attitude or film
language. With this film, the director has a unique stylistic charm. The acting is
also very good. I have the same feeling about the ending, I feel it a bit too explicit
and leaves little to the imagination. On the whole, the director's humour andrhythm are excellent. His ability to establish a distinctive context and create his
own world is rare. Not only does he have good filming techniques, his imagination
ability to use film language is also excellent.

Cheung: I agree with your point of view. As a narrative film, this work is quite outstanding.
Among the finalist works, I admire the few that manages to successfully constructtheir own style with visual elements, and Lucky Cat does the best job. It uses the
lucky cat and the gods to create a fantasy world, which stands for human greed.
Also, the actors are excellent. It is the most enjoyable and least awkward finalist
work, which is very hard to achieve. The film has Fruit Chan’s early style, a bit
like Hollywood Hong Kong, and it is not easy to execute. I really like the lucky cat
at the end. Although the imagery and characters feel at odds with the ending and it
is a bit straightforward, the visuals are beautiful and interesting on the whole. The
character design and art direction are excellent, and the cast is also good, especially
Larine Tang Yue Ping.
1

Law:

I think the two female characters in the film are eye-catching, which we mentioned
in the first round. In terms of drama, the performance is quite even. Some otherworks mix professional actors and amateurs, and sometimes the former are too
prominent or over-act, making the overall performance uneven. The dialogue inthis work is natural, even though a lot of foul language is used, it does not detractfrom my enjoyment of it, and the first half is nice to watch. The absurd parts,
especially the scene of the fat man, are really very "Fruit Chan" style. However, as
Wong Chun (Wong) said, some scenes should be more free, otherwise they willappear too ordinary in comparison with other scenes. Some of the off-screen stuff
is nice too, for example the two heroine speaking Shanghainese, that part works
really well and powerful, which is distinct from other Hongkongers in the film. In
the last part of picking up the bills, I think there is a problem with the execution.
Compared with the rhythm of the latter part, the first part was brisker.

Mak:

I agree with all of your views. The handling of the work is excellent, and that's
what everyone agrees on. I think the film is a work that can successfully express
the director's world. What impresses me is the character design. When eachcharacter appears, their motivation and purpose are very clear, which means thatthe director is also good at controlling the narrative of the story even though it is a
short film. As mentioned, the first 3/4 of the film is very fluid, and I was able tounderstand the purpose of each character, the conflict, and why those things
happened. Regarding the lucky cat, I didn't like it in the first round, but after
watching the film a few times, I understand why he ended with it. The director’s
imagination and ability to visualize the story are evidence of his boldness.
Although there are many things in the film that can be more unrestrained andadvance the plot further, it is evident that the director has many ideas, but due tovarious limitations, he was unable to execute them, so the end result may notcompletely be what he wanted to present. Yet he was still willing to incorporate
these elements, which is worthy of admiration. The director must have wanted tomake it a more surreal ending, and even if the final results may not be what hewanted, it is still a good attempt.

Cheung: The visuals are good, but the direction that the characters take is wrong. It is a bit
abrupt to have the character suddenly possess a different motive.
Mak:

In the previous round, we also felt that the characters did not need to be taught thatkind of lesson. I can understand the director's motivation, his desire to use thisscene.

Wong:

I understand your point of view. I believe that everyone present here does not likethe ending very much. As a director who is not fully mature, compared with thefilm language he established in the first half, this ending is actually risky. Yet he iswilling to give it a try, which shows his experimental spirit and willingness to takerisks, even if he does not win any praise in the end. I believe the director
understands the risks. After all, he has worked hard to establish a film language,
yet he is still willing to try.

2

Mak:

Yes, the handling of the first half is very mature, and everything is within his
control.

Law:

Watching the film again, I just noticed a line of dialogue. The girl in the car asks
the male character "Do you like Hong Kong?", and the boy replies "If you havemoney, you’d like it." This relates back to the lucky cat. Hong Kong is like a lucky
cat, but in the end, everyone is eaten up by money.

Fan:

The next one is Blindfold.

Wong:

I appreciate that the whole creative theme and motivation of the work are veryclear, and it is about oppression of an overwhelming majority on minorities within
religious faiths. I like this theme and the storytelling, but after watching it, I feel apity that the work failed to fully express its best ideas, including its own original
intention and ambition, and in the end only managed to convey a small part. One of
the reasons is that the film is too straightforward, and the dialogue is too obvious.
This is the director's choice, and my feeling is that he lacks confidence, so heshows us everything he wants to express, resulting in a superficial work. In fact,
the imagery of the work is mature, and the themes are also highly developed. If he
was more confident, he could have told a better story. I felt dissatisfied while
watching it. I appreciated the opening of the story, as well as the original intention
and setting of the director, but the final result is not the best, and the story is notwell explored. Maybe this has something to do with the dialogue and script
writing. However, the director’s execution abilities are high.

Chan:This story is hard to express in a short film. The director wants to convey manythings. Besides religion, he also hopes talk about society as a whole, and even therelationship between father and son. This is not easy to do. In the end, he could
only use his own method to present this work, but I agree that it could have beenmuch better, which is a pity. At the same time, he has to deal with many childactors, and the lead actor's performance is competent. I believe the director also
spent a lot of effort in directing the protagonist, and this is a hard subject to film.

Wong:This story has innate limitations in subject matter, and has to rely heavily on childactors, whose acting skills are limited. The director failed to solve this problem inproduction.

Cheung: The skill of this work is just as high as the previous film. For example, in terms of
directing skills, the director did a good job in guiding the child actors. The main
flaw is that there is too much that he wants to express. Apart from religion, it also
talks about people being restrained by the current social system. However, theexploration of the theme is not deep enough, and falls into the common
understanding of the topic, which means that even people who have not watched
the film can arrive at the same understanding of the issues. Therefore, I am notsatisfied with the way this work conveys its theme. His understanding of religion
also lacks sufficient depth, at least it is not enough to be conveyed through thisfilm. If the work is about the whole social system, there is no entry point for people3

to understand it, and the character setting appear rigid and flat. Although thedirector’s skills are very mature, he has certain underlying deficiencies.
Law:

There is a line in the artist’s statement that "this is not just about religion". The
work doesn’t just talk about Chinese and Western religions such as God andGuanyin, he is actually talking about how the society shapes religions. God ismale, and Guanyin is female. It interprets religion through people, such as the way
the mother and the principal depict religions and beliefs, and unveil the fact thatthey are serving as functions and instruments in the society. The director is very
ambitious in choosing this subject, and uses the statue mountain in Wah Fu Estate
as a point of comparison, pointing out that the statues are being worshipped atschools and homes, whereas ironically some of them were abandoned on the hill.
The Superman figure given by the father is the best companion for the protagonist,
which symbolizes his childhood idol and reflects the father’s image. But the father
passed away very early, and the protagonist’s childhood was gone. He can only
follow the religion values of his mother and the schools in life, while he was forced
to accept when the two are actually conflicting with each other. I think the idea thatthe work hopes to express and its execution are very interesting, such as using aflock of sheep to represent kids who are manipulated to follow what people say.
These “sheep” are not pure and simple at all, which is almost like an adult world
with bullying and competition exist among them. The protagonist takes a bath with
the Superman twice, does it symbolize baptism? Nonetheless the protagonist
finally places Superman on the mountain in Wah Fu Estate. I wondered whether healso gives up on Superman? In the last scene, the protagonist takes off the black
cloth that blindfolded him. Does it mean that he now believes in nothing? The
protagonist's expression remains the same, but his actions seem to convey a newunderstanding. The story does advance, but maybe as everyone said, thedevelopment of the end is not enough?

Mak:

I like this work. Even though the children's acting skills are limited, the director isvery good at guiding the children, including their ensemble scenes. The reason why
I like this work is that I gave up thinking about its metaphor for society towards thelatter part, but returned to the simple idea of a child who misses his father.

Cheung: I agree that this is the point that the work should emphasize the most, but it's a pitythat the director didn't put more effort there in the end. He has too much that hewants to say.
Mak:

From the audience’s point of view, I was touched by the film. The children have togive up the Superman that they cherish the most, and have to let go in the end. My
understanding is that the protagonist knows that he needs to grow up, so he looks at
the world in his own way.

Chan:

I understand that Superman is a symbol, because it is a gift from his father, so in
the end when the protagonist puts down Superman, it means that he lets go of his
attachment to his father and his insistence on going to heaven together. This is how
the director approached the father storyline. But I agree that this part could be
developed a bit more. In the early part of the film, the animosity between the two is4

so heavy, but in the end he simply lets go of Superman, which is too abrupt, maybe
due to the length of the film or other reasons.
Cheung: The story also doesn’t explain why he lets go of Superman.
Mak:

Just like Lucky Cat, the logic of the characters is not brought through to the end.

Wong:

I think the director placed too much emphasis on this child's performance in the
beginning. How much the kid can carry is equivalent to how much the film canpresent. I thought that the director can reduce the emphasis on the blunt
performance of this child in the film.

Mak:

He started with an ambitious theme, but he really didn't express that much. All theelements are handled with care.

Wong:

I think that this kid can't carry all the messages the director wanted to express. It
would be better if the work relied on more imagery or other elements.

Cheung: I hold the opposite opinion. During filming, the director may have found that thechild as the subject works really well, so he focused more on him, and the othercharacters in the film became not as prominent. The two most fascinating scenes in
the work are the one in which the child finds out that his father cannot go toheaven, and the other is the bath scene.
Mak:

Maybe the child represents the director himself. However, the scene of the childarguing with his mother shows the limit of his acting ability, and the mother's
dialogue is too typical.

Cheung: The bad guys are too stereotypical. There should be more layers to the mother andteacher characters.
Wong:

In this scene, if the director zoomed out a little bit, or reduced the dialogue, so thatthe audience can focus on the expressions of the characters, the scene will be
improved.

Mak:

The scene that bothers me the most is the one where the child scolds his motherback, saying that there is no god to bless them. Once he says this line, the work
becomes weak. The director may be afraid that the audience will not understandthe children's inner struggles, so he states his message directly. The scene makes
me feel the child does really understand the dialogue, because the statement camefrom the director, not from the character.

Law:

I agree.

Fan:

The next one is The Rest.

Mak:

This is a work that makes me feel conflicted, I cried every time I watched it. There
are many things in it that touched me, such as the setting, the longing for others,
5the situation when people get old and reach a state where they cannot have a proper
life, etc. However, the meticulousness of the work sometimes prevents me frombeing fully convinced by the story.
Cheung: The work’s starting point is art direction. I really like that the film revolves aroundthe community of Hung Hom. All the scenes are very detailed, which is also thepart that touches me. But what disturbs me the most about it is the artistic
treatment, that is, the makeup of the characters, which made me completely unable
to immerse myself in the protagonist's world. The styling is very crucial.
Mak:
The character would be better without eyeliner.
Chan:

The problem of makeup is even more obvious on the big screen.

Wong:

The appearance of the main character is completely different from that of the
supporting characters. I feel that the presence of the main character is too strong. In
fact, his appearance should be more realistic.

Cheung: The granny character feels natural.
Law:

The contrast between professional actors and amateurs in the works is too strong.

Mak:

Yes, the lead character keeps reminding me that she is an actress.

Chan:

That's why I get alienated from the film. I kept feeling that I was watching theprotagonist "play" a role instead of embodying the role.

Mak:

The scene on the incline road touches me every time I see it, but the position andmovement of the main character's fall in that scene are very precise, a reminderthat she is acting. However, I was still moved because the story itself has tension.

Cheung: The director's skills are actually quite good.
Chan:

I agree, including how he evokes emotion. However, the work failed to convince
me that this is the story of the character. Although the heroine puts her heart into
acting, she often easily overacts. For example, in the scene where she is unable toenter the house and sits outside singing, her emotions are appropriate, but it’s along take, if someone encounters the same problem, can she still sing like that?

Mak:

She sings too soon, maybe if she starts singing after sitting down for a while
longer, the effect might be better.

Wong:

Frankly speaking, I am not touched by this work. The construction and lighting of
the scenes are excellent, it looks seemingly raw but is full of delicate touches. For
example, the messy looking apartment, the soft light permeating from thetransparent plastic bag, and the contrasting colours. However, I don’t know how toview this work. As a work that is finely polished and manipulated by a director, I
think the progression of the story is too slow and lacks advancement; if I judge it as6

plain and ordinary story, it is not real enough. We can clearly see the director’s
manipulation of details.
Mak:

When discussing the first work just now, we asked whether the director has
established his own context and expressed his message well. I think the director of
The Rest is concerned with the issue at hand, but if he truly understands the issues,
would he have made such a film or let the actor deliver such a performance? Hedramatizes the story too much, making the whole work contradictory, and there is asense of disunity about it.

Wong:

He has a high level of production skills, but he didn't choose the most suitable
narrative method for this story, including the visuals, the choice of film language,
and even how to shape the script. Even though each element looks good by itself,they don’t fit together. On the other hand, I like the director's portrayal of thegranny as a bad character, because generally the old people in films are seen as
kind, but the work portrays the granny as a bit selfish and ill-tempered. However,the subsequent development of the characters has nothing to do with theirpersonalities. The director is not bold enough to continue developing it in that
direction, but rather puts the characters into a tragic predicament that does notcome from their personalities. If this bad granny faces difficulties and tries to solve
them with bad intentions, it will lead to other problems for her to learn and face.
But in this film, no matter whether the granny's character is good or bad, her
ending is still the same, there is no sense of causation. For this short film, this feels
unreal.

Mak:

The author also throws out other information to the audience, but does not let
everyone know more, or how to solve it, such as the identity of the mistress.

Cheung: How do you understand the photo in the biscuit tin at the end? The author gives nohint or any explanation at all. Is the photo of the granny or does it belong toanother family?
Law:

Because there are children in the photo, it must be another family.

Chan:

But the story doesn't explain why the granny never opens the tin. Maybe shedoesn't want to open it, because the man doesn’t miss her the most.

Cheung: If this part were handled properly, the effect can be very powerful.
Wong:

I kept thinking that the director could have been bolder and more aggressive. If hewants to talk about the two moon cake tins, he should have centred the whole filmaround this. Now it feels like there are a lot of scattered elements, and the director
tried to present a more natural effect, but the end results is hard to understand. The
set-up of the story is not very effective and the work is not realistic enough.

Fan:

The next one is As I Imagine My Body Moving.

Wong:

I like it very much.
7

Cheung: Me too, this is my number one work.
Mak:

It didn't leave a deep impression in the first round, because the sound equipment
setup was not as good as in theatres. When watching it again today, I realized thatthe sound of the film is very important and helped me enter her world.

Chan:

I agree. The sound of the film is very important.

Cheung: I think the creator interweaves her life into the work, which is very powerful. Did
the work come first, which changes the direction of her life? Or did her destiny
come first, followed by the work? This film represents the idea that the artist’s life
is embodied in her work. The creator is a performer, director, dancer and artist at
the same time, and these parallel identities makes the work feel excellent. Visually,
she is sensitive enough to lighting and the composition of each frame, even when
there is no extra lighting, there is good contrast and composition to attract me tokeep watching. The music design and music selection are excellent. The film is apoem expressed by the director about her own feelings, and it is filled with her own
memories and emotions.
Wong:

After watching the previous narrative films that showed skilful techniques, thiswork opens up the various possibilities that images can evoke. Its ambiguity or
flow state makes the work feel alive. It does not force any information or statement
on me, but this does not mean that it has no meaning. It still bears a certain weight,
but it is open for everyone to interpret. The imagery is rich. I also appreciate thatthe director, as a professional dancer, is willing to record her tired and weak body,
like the scene where she climbs down from her bed, which makes a strong
impression.

Cheng:

The works simultaneously touches on the subject matters of the body, spirit,
society and disintegration of architecture, all of which are very powerful. I only
just realized that the film is 30 minutes long, it didn’t feel that long when I watched
it.

Wong:

The film transcends real time because of it flows.

Chan:

The ending is impressive, when she talks about how she got injured, and the scene
shifts to the dismantling of the CCDC dance centre. The transition from theindividual to the space and from the body to the mind is great.

Wong:

The monologue of the director, as a person who records herself who has
experienced a big event, feels very sincere. She does not try to dramatize or
tragicize the matter, but only records her experiences and the imagery they bringabout, which is commendable. A lot of times these contemporary non-narrative
films are overly polished, but this film doesn't have that problem, nor does it
imitate other works.

8

Law:

It is a work that I would like no matter how many times I watch it. I like its
composition very much. There is a shot of a window at the beginning, and you can
see the city is outside. Then it switches to a dancing scene, and it turns out that thescene is actually inside a hospital. This contrast is very impressive. In addition, thefilm is about CCDC. This dance centre was dismantled due to events and politicalsituation in 2019, so it has a certain historical weight. The protagonist also talks
about an accident that happened in 2019, which reminds her of an incident on a
train in Indonesia many years ago. When I watched the work, I unconsciously
connected these events, which gave me a strong feeling of sadness. The work
contains many sad elements, including the disintegration of the dance company
after many years and her personal experiences.

Chan:

It's a pity that we couldn't watch Lost a part of at this screening. The two films arevery suitable for comparison. They are both about personal and urban trauma.

Mak:

They adopt different methods, but they have similar elements and are about similar
topics. However, when I watch As I Imagine My Body Moving this time, I feel that
it is relatively real because it uses her own self as a starting point.

Fan:

The next one is FLY.

Wong:This work is a pity. The beginning is challenging, but when the song plays, it does
not bring any surprises to me. The more outstanding part is the character design
and the actors’ performance.

Chan:

The first part of the film is fascinating. Its storytelling is quite bold. For example,
when a fly suddenly lands on the screen, I want to know what happens next.
Unfortunately, nothing that happens afterwards surprised me. You can see that thedirector wants to respond to social issues. Although he has good ideas and tries topresent them in a playful way, the work is still a bit superficial.

Mak:

I don't mind his superficiality, because the whole film-watching experience wasinteresting, and I didn't need to think about anything but just accepted all thestrange juxtapositions brought by the work, and I felt very satisfied after watching
it. The grotesque and playful rhythms of the work are handled well, and at thesame time, many direct expressions are added, such as the superimposition ofchildren and Galileo, which is novel.

Cheung: The work reflects the spirit of the times.
Chan:

But it’s a pity that the story ends after the character is chased by the police.

Mak:

I will not seriously analyse why the director did this. He made things up as he went
along.

Wong:

It has an unrestrained and imprecise aesthetic, which is different from conventional
methods.

9

Chan:

This kind of boldness is also worthy of encouragement.

Fan:

The next work is A Long Walk.

Wong:

I actually like it, and I enjoy the viewing experience. But what did I gain from thework? Actually nothing, but I didn't mind, I just meditating on it for a while. It has
tension, release, and the struggle of the artist. It is alive, it feels like I am looking ata tank of fish, and it is beautiful.

Cheung: This is an excellent dance film. It only consists of an architectural space, a simple
lighting setup, camera movements, and dancers' movements. Its technique isaccurate and excellent.
Chan:

The film is enjoyable. When watching it, I felt the camera is dancing with thedancers. The camera and sound are well arranged, making you feel like you are in
the waterway with the dancer and going through the whole process.

Mak:

I also like the work, which purely embodies the emotions of the performer. The
directors used very simple techniques, so that you don't need to think and digest
too much information when watching it, and just feel the emotions of the character.

Wong:

As a dance film, it allows you to really appreciate the dance. It has a distinctive
aesthetic.

Cheung: Its purity makes the viewing experience pure.
Fan:

The next work is Trek of an Extinct Bird.

Mak:

I liked this film very much when I first watched it, but this time around I didn't feelso strongly about it.

Cheung: It has the feeling of a Tarkovsky film.
Chan:

The cinematography is outstanding. The film doesn’t rely heavily on dialogue,
letting visuals convey the theme of the story. What the work wants to say isactually very simple, it purely expresses an atmosphere and a state. The mostimpressive thing about it is the visuals.

Cheung: I like it that this work cannot be understood through words alone, but also withfeelings with images. You sense a variety of emotions in the film, and you also
understand some themes, such as nostalgia, the feeling of exile, disappearance, etc.
The influence of Tarkovsky's style is ever-present. I am curious about how the film
was shot. The filmmaker has to go into the mountains, capture sunrise, and there isalso a sheep. This work cannot be interpreted with verbal logic, but contains its
own film language.

10

Wong:

I feel conflicted, for me its context is not three-dimensional enough. Whenwatching it, I sometimes thought that the film was handled very well, and I
appreciated the director's intentions, but there were parts that alienated me. I thinkthat when directors make films, they also need to decide what language to use to
make it convincing for the audience.

Mak:

Whenever there is a dramatic scene or dialogue, it takes me out of the film. If thefilm simply shows the state of exile, I could have enjoyed it.

Wong:

When people are in the wild, they face many restrictions, so I also appreciate thedirector's efforts. The images are full of vitality, but the task she set for herself isvery challenging.

Cheung: She is indeed a bit in over her head when dealing with dramatic elements.
Chan:

The old guy who was in the wildfire at the end is still breathing, but the character is
supposed to be dead.

Wong:

This is probably a Fresh Wave film. It is very impressive that it can achieve somuch under this condition. It's not just technically impressive, the director's
imagination is also bold.

Cheung: Those mountain fire animations are really beautiful, and the mountain scenery ofHong Kong looks like Europe. The director has very sharp eyes.
Mak:

The director's vision is very powerful. Many scenes don’t look like Hong Kong.
You know where it was filmed. The director constructs a very distinctive
environment, a different world.

Wong:

I admire her ambition.

Fan:

The next work is April's Interlude.

Cheung: I don't think films should be in black and white. I don't understand why black andwhite was used.
Chan:

The reason for using black and white is to express the idea that the period of thepandemic was colourless.

Cheung: This is too straightforward.
Law:

I also surmise it is because of the pandemic. Watching the work again this time, I
felt that it was not as attractive as before. In the first round, I thought it was aninteresting story about the beauty industry during the pandemic, but compared withother works today, I felt that it was a bit weak. The reason why the protagonist and
Siu Ye (Lo Chun Yip) breaks up is a bit of a joke, just because the other party wasin a different country in 2019, which shows that they have different values.

11Cheung: I think the character design of Siu Ye (Lo Chun Yip) and the handling of the one or
two scenes with him are poor. Her portrayal of men lacks something.
Mak:

I don't have strong feelings for this work. You just mentioned that there areproblems with the director's portrayal of men, but I think she has faithfully
presented some of the protagonist's values. I think that in reality, some couples
break up because of these reasons.

Wong:

I also don’t have much feeling for the work. As a 30-minute short, it records a
story with a little bit of romantic element under the pandemic. Other than that, it
didn't give me any insights, the film fell within my expectations. Of course, notevery film has to present something new and unknown, but this work did notpresent any profound observations.

Cheung: I think the director presented a female perspective, but this angle is not unique.
Wong:

The language and aesthetics of the film are not particularly developed.

Fan:

The last work is Anatomy of Rats.

Mak:

I feel that the directors want to present a distinctive world, but my feeling is that it
is incomplete. I believe that the filmmakers have put in a lot of hard work, andhave even gone above and beyond, but for some reason, my viewing experience
was not enjoyable.

Chan:

I agree that there are many problems in the work itself. What impressed me mostwas the chase scene in the corridor. The directors used light to show the tense
relationship, and they managed to handle these elements successfully. But on thewhole, there are many inexplicable parts in the work, such as the dance at the end.

Cheung: The directors wanted the scene to be farcical, but they were not able to achieve thiseffect.
Chan:

I agree, so the scene becomes a chaotic situation.

Wong:

I appreciate that more and more works have non-realistic or fictional elements.
This kind of unrealistic style is bold, but at the same time it challenges the
directors’ ability to construct their own world. This is a difficult work, and manyscenes are awkward. Perhaps they need some fantasy and allegorical art direction
to make the film work.

Cheung: The film is not absurd enough.
Wong:

These works are partially connected with reality, which becomes a hindrance. They
should throw away all elements of reality and recreate another world, but this will
involve more imagination and resources.

12Cheung: It takes a lot of work to make such fantastical works, including using various
content and symbolism for character design, and directors have to decide if their art
director is able to carry it off. Some directors have bold ambitions but lack theability to execute them.
Wong:

If they built up enough of an allegorical aesthetic, the scene with the school
principal's didactic lecture would be effective. Several works we have discussed
were ambitious, severely testing the creators’ directing skills. It goes beyond
cinematography, lighting and other technical, it’s about the imagination.

Fan:

Now we have reached the award nomination stage. Maybe everyone can nominate
works for the Gold award first.

Wong:

I would like to propose As I Imagine My Body Moving as the Gold award.

Mak:

I have no objection.

(Everyone agrees).
Fan:

It is unanimous, As I Imagine My Body Moving is the Gold award winner. We now
nominate the Silver award.

Wong:

I propose Lucky Cat.

Chan:

I choose Lucky Cat and A Long Walk.

Cheung: My choice is between Lucky Cat and Trek of an Extinct Bird.
Law:

I choose Blindfold.

Mak:

I like Trek of an Extinct Bird a lot, but it has problems. I propose Lucky Cat andTrek of an Extinct Bird.

Wong:

It depends on what we want to encourage. These works all have their own strong
points.

Mak:

In terms of number of votes, it’s easy to see the results.

Fan:

Works with the most votes may mean that it is the most average. You have todecide if a work deserves an award.

Mak:

I have no objections to this result. Lucky Cat is an excellent work overall.

Wong:

If we choose Trek of an Extinct Bird, it means we appreciate its ambition. Lucky
Cat borrows a lot from existing Hong Kong and genre films, but Trek of an Extinct
Bird is a bit excess in content.

13

Law:

My vote can go to Lucky Cat.

Mak:

Then why don’t we give Trek of an Extinct Bird Special Mention?

Fan:

Do jury members who voted for A Long Walk and Blindfold to get Silver award
agree?

Law:

I propose Blindfold get Special Mention.

Chan:

I don’t object to Trek of an Extinct Bird. After all, one of the director of A Long
Walk already got Gold.

Wong:

I pick Trek of an Extinct Bird to recognize her ambition.

Cheung: It must have taken a lot of effort to make this film.
Wong:

From my point of view, Blindfold is complete and meets industry standards, but theambition of Trek of an Extinct Bird is more worthy of encouragement. Especiallyin an environment like Hong Kong, her challenging and crazy idea should berecognized. I hope she knows we appreciate her boldness.

Mak:

I don’t object to this result. Lucky Cat is an excellent work overall.

Fan:

Angela (Law), do you agree?

Law:

For the record, I still vote for Blindfold.

Fan:

Then it is decided. Lucky Cat gets Silver. Trek of an Extinct Bird gets Special
Mention.

28th ifva Open Category Award Winners

Gold AwardAs I Imagine My Body Moving
Elysa Wendi

14

Silver Award
Lucky Cat
Yeung Kwong-chungSpecial Mention
Trek of an Extinct Bird
Ho Lok-yee Gloria

15