th18 ifva Awards - Youth Category Jury Meeting Transcript
Jury Members:

Adam Wong (Wong), Cheuk Wan-chi (Cheuk), Jessey Tsang (Tsang), Adrian
Chow (Chow), Tang Shu-wing (Tang)ifva Representatives: Teresa Kwong (Kwong), Kattie Fan (Fan), Christine Lui (Lui)Kwong: The mission of ifva is to encourage media creation in Hong Kong and Asia as well
as exchanges among filmmakers in these regions. The competition emphasizes
content, form and technique, but we pay special attention to independent spirit andcreativity. Do you have any questions?
Tang:

Can you explain what is meant by independent spirit and creativity? Especiallyindependent spirit.

Kwong: The organizer defines independent spirit firstly by a film’s production background.
Basically the works we promote are not commercial films, because we emphasize
autonomous artistic creation, and if the work brings out the filmmaker’s personalideas, style or distinctiveness. This is just a general way of interpreting independent
spirit. Independent spirit can also be seen in a work’s ideology or means ofexpression. If a work is too close to mainstream productions in this regard, then it
may not fit in with our independent spirit requirement. However I want to stress that
we leave the final say on this topic to our jury members. Do you have otherquestions? If not, we shall begin our discussion of the 9 finalist works.
Cheuk:

I like Symbiosis, Molding and Red Apple. Aside from these three, the rest are notvery outstanding either in part or as a whole. These three works are different fromthe rest, and from my perspective they are quite outstanding in some respects.
Therefore my choices would be Symbiosis and Molding.

Fan:

What does the other new jury member think?

Tang:

I have to think about this, if independent spirit is the quality most valued by thiscompetition. According to the definition of independent spirit provided by theorganizer, are all the works made to be entered into this competition?

Tsang:

Not all of them are. Some are made for this competition, some aren’t.

Tang:

Some works are produced for a certain purpose, for example, to fulfill a course
requirement in a school.

Tsang:

Not necessarily. Some are produced out of the filmmaker’s own volition, like the one
about the granny.

1

Tang:The point she mentioned about “non-mainstream aesthetics” is even more
complicated.

Chow:

I think “non-mainstream aesthetics” can be quite open. Judging whether a work has
mainstream aesthetics can be very subjective.

Wong:

I feel a work does not have to have “non-mainstream aesthetics”. The organizer
emphasizes independent spirit. Some filmmakers may deliberately try to makesomething that is “non-mainstream, and the results may be very “mainstream”. I feelthat works that come from the heart and are produced out of the filmmaker’s free
will may be more reflective of independent spirit.

Cheuk:

Speaking of free will, some works really made me feel the passion the creators havein making the film, as if they would give everything they have to make it.

Wong:

There are many works like that every year.

Tang:

Can you share your past experiences as a juror?

Cheuk:

I place a lot of importance on whether the work is good, and whether I find it
unforgettable.

Wong:

On the whole I find the works this year to be quite decent, and none made me fallasleep or “cut up the chair.” However I can’t compare, because I can’t pick 10
outstanding works this year as all the works contain flaws as well as strengths. I
have strong feelings for all the 9 finalist works this year. However, there was one
film that I thought very good, was not well liked by the other two jurors in the firstround, so it did not become a finalist. On the whole these works are generally good.
I initially liked Molding, but I can’t stand its sloganizing at the end.

Cheuk:

Did the teacher make them do it? I like the fact that even without the slogan, you
can still understand the message.

Tsang:The technique of this work is good and the director did it all himself. I liked it initiallyas well, but this is the third time I watched it, so I’m a bit tired of it. The rhythm of thefilm is good, and his actors are not bad. Undeniably, there is a cinematic quality tothis work.

Cheuk:

I also agree that Molding is very cinematic. He did very well according to his
abilities. I also like Symbiosis. Most of the finalist works this year have the city ofHong Kong as their main subject matter.

Tsang:The Hong Kong spirit?

2

Cheuk:That’s right, this kind of topic. As one of the films in this area, I find Red Apple to bevery sincere. But when I watched Symbiosis, I sense that it is about the changing
times and the relationship between people. It uses a special technique to talk aboutsomething that everyone is talking about, and his perspective is different from most,so I am more fond of Symbiosis.

Chow:

Let’s talk about Red Apple first, which I like.

Cheuk:Red Apple is very good!

Chow:

This is my second time watching Red Apple, and the first time on the big screen.
My feelings have been altered. After watching it again, I feel that it could be morecondensed, because there are parts in the middle that are a little loose. However, I
am still very fond of this work, because it did for me something ordinary but that I
don’t do myself, which is to stand in a market and observe the people. Ordinarily
when I go to the market, I would just buy things, or maybe stay a bit longer at stallswith whom I’m on good terms, but I don’t go and talk to every stall-owner and ask
them if they want their children to enter the business. I think the directors did in ourstead something important, and it is something that at least I won’t do. Fromobserving these stall-owners, we can see these ordinary people come to life. The
dancing scene at the end is very inspired, and advanced the storyline using music
and speeded up the film’s formerly lethargic pace. That scene is great. Many of thepeople in the film say something similar, that because they were not highly educated,
they had no right to expect a better working environment or even better living
conditions. I think this is something worth thinking about. Just because they are notwell educated, they have no right to expect a better working environment or living
conditions? Their less than ideal working and living conditions are a structural social
problem. The work brings out these things for us to consider, although it is notnecessarily the director’s intention. However the work gave me room have thesekinds of thinking, so I prefer Red Apple.

Wong:

From the perspective of its directors, I think they explored as they went along. At the
beginning of the film, the directors did not seem to have a very clear direction, andjust seem to be wandering. I’m not sure if the editing is chronological to the filming,but by the end they found their direction. My feeling is that they was still exploring as
they went along, and found their direction by looking more deeply into matters, so
the end result is very good. This is why the work lacks a definite point of view. I
remember Adrian Chow saying last time that he likes the film precisely because it
does not have a definite point of view. I also agree that you do not have to have avalue judgment about something. But I still feel that the shots are not curious
enough.

Chow:

Not focused enough.

3

Wong:

That’s right, not focused. You don’t know what the camera wants to watch, and isjust wandering, capturing what it happens to see. This is one of the flaws of this film.

Tsang:In the previous round of jury deliberations, I my feelings towards Red Apple were
just so-so, and I was more fond of Rainbow. However, after watching them for asecond time just now, my views towards Red Apple have improved. It reminds meof myself more than 10 years ago, exploring the world with a video camera,collecting bits and pieces of footage as I went along. The scene with the lady at theend is an inspired touch. Certainly parts of it are too long, but it leaves room at theend for people to think about the story of the red apple in the market. Among thefinalist works, this film is quite outstanding. Even though it has its flaws, but it tries to
explore the world around us. I think about the two little girls who go around asking
simple and silly questions, which reflects how young children view the world. This is
why I like Red Apple. I still like Rainbow because of its simple story about thedirector visiting his grandma. Actually of the 70 entrants in this category, many arefilms produced for the school’s TV channel. I really miss the works I’d seen in thiscategory in the past about growing up, which I rarely see these days. Many people
may feel that films about family members are ‘sure win’ because they can movepeople for sure and win prizes. Aside from this issue, the filmmaker and the subject
must have a close relationship. Only a grandchild can make this film about his
grandma. The grandma is showing signs of Alzheimer’s disease, and she mumbles
and sings in front of the director, who captures the lovely interaction between them,such as the way the grandma walks. I like the fact that this young filmmaker
explores things around him and records those close to him. By comparison, manygroup works explore the Hong Kong “under the Lion Rock” spirit, while Rainbow
explores the media interaction of young filmmakers. I can’t quite accept The Boy. I
feel that it is too mainstream, and I don’t like it.

Cheuk:

It feels very cult film, like it could be used to enliven a party.

Tsang:

That’s right. I also like Molding because its technique is very mature. Just like what
Cheuk said, Symbiosis belongs to a very special genre. Among the finalists, it is
the most experimental. If I had to choose three award winners, I feel we would needfurther discussions, since this is no easy task.

Chow:

I want to add that my impression of The Boy is just so-so. I want to give young
people some advice. I feel the director is overly ambitious if he wants to make amainstream movie. According to their overall appearance, the actors do not seem to
fit the roles in the film.

Cheuk:

They perform their roles no matter how unsuitable they seem. The gap between thatand reality is one of the distinguishing characteristics of this film.

Chow:

The character named “Big Uncle” is not really a big uncle. He’s just a middle aged
4

guy. The self-styled scary contract killer is not too believable either.
Cheuk:The part where the young guy wearing sports shorts claims to be the killer for the
association at ifc is also unconvincing.

Chow:

This scene reminds me of Matt Damon in The Bourne Identity, but the film failed todeliver the right effect. I think the director is too ambitious in some respects. With
this cast, they don’t need to film this kind of story. I appreciate the fact that thedirector was able to make such a professional looking work without special effects.
However, watching it a second time, I was less impressed with the professional
technique. When watching this film against other entries, this film really stood out.
But watching it again, this feeling was less so. My advice to young people is thatthey should not be too ambitious. They should make films according to the kinds ofactors they have at their disposal, and work within their means. The result would
probably be better.

Tang:

I think I can divide the 9 films into 3 categories, dramas, documentaries and films
like Symbiosis which are more based on image and form. I don’t know why they
made their films, so I could only judge by the outcome. If I know their intentions, I’llbe able to tell whether they had achieved what they set out to do. I am moreconcerned with whether the work displays certain potential that would auger better
works in the future. If it contains some outstanding qualities then it’s even better.
Some of these outstanding qualities may be consistent throughout the work, anddisplays the filmmaker’s ability to handle the medium vis a vis what he wants to put
across. In other cases the work may be only so-so, but there are some parts thatare more interesting, or that there are strong feelings expressed in certain situations.
For example, The Boy is a good case in point, because it is different from otherfinalists. From the perspective of the script’s structure, it seems to have borrowed
some elements from mainstream cinema. The audience sees a clear story, withcertain characters and shooting style. For a filmmaker under the age of 18, he isable to use editing, background music and different camera angles to tell his story,
which is commendable. But from the perspective of the script, the story involves
different foreign countries, and the main character becomes a killer, and there aremany innocent people. Perhaps the director does not quite know what he is trying tosay. When he was writig the script, perhaps he thinks he has made things clear, but
to the audience things are still a mystery.
For the point of view of a drama, the sructure of the script belongs to a certain genre.
By comparison, Twin Ice is also a drama, but for me it is closer to the feeling ofsuch films as You Are the Apple of My Eye or Big Blue Lake, because the story
takes place in a village. It captures the feeling of many young people so-called inlove or the feeling of intimacy between them, and it makes me smile in recognition.
In terms of the script and its treatment of character, Twin Ice is better than The Boy.
The latter is closer to a typical Hong Kong cop drama in its style and narrative5

rhythm. Whether he is copying certain Hong Kong films we have no way of knowing,
but it is obvious that he is influenced by mainstream films.
For films that are closer in style to documentaries, Red Apple left a deep
impression on me. Whether or not the directors started out with a clear direction,
they were able to capture the reaction of the stall owners, and arranged the storiesof the different characters, culminating in the scene of the woman dancing. After
digesting this film, it captures an important social issue, and how the people of acertain social class view their own existence. From this perspective, the directors’
achievement and potential is stronger than that of On the Same Boat and Good
Riddance.
I think the best work of the lot is Rainbow, because the granny is unconscious of
the camera, and is simply being herself. The outstanding thing about the film is thatit tells the story of the granny and the grandchild through their normal dailyinteractions.
As for Molding, I agree that it is very strong for a direcor under the age of 18, it iseven stronger than Symbiosis. But I was perplxed when one of the characterssuddenly takes out Tuesdays with Morrie.
On the whole, of the 9 finalist works, Red Apple is the best documentary, while fordramas, Twin Ice is better than The Boy and Invisible notes. The latter’s handlingof the script and actors are still not mature enough. The actors in Twin Ice are very
good. Also I feel that we should consider giving awards to both Rainbow andMolding.
Wong:

Just now, Adrian mentioned that he feels the director of The Boy is overly ambitious.
I have some views about this. I wrote about this work in the ifva booklet. I haveseen other similar works in the past, and this work is not bad compared with theothers. The work displays a devil may care attitude. In previous editions, I haveseen similar works, like young people playing killers, or using Halloween costumes
from school to play vampyres. Sometimes this phenomenom cn be seen as young
people’s cult film.

The Boy tries very hard and does it very seriously, and it isdifferent from other genre films. In those other films, the filmmakers just go all out
and have fun, but for this film, I feel that the director tries very hard and takes thefilm very seriously.
Cheuk:

Do you think the director is aware of the casting problem and the problems with thedialogue?

Wong:

I feel that he is not aware of them. From my experience dealing with these directors,
they always make the same mistake. From our perspective these are obvious
problems, but they don’t feel they are problems, and would even go on in the same6

direction and repeat the same mistakes.
Tang:

They really believe in what they are doing.

Wong:

For example, when I taught secondary school how to make films, and if there arefather and mother characters in the story, I would ask them who would play them.
They would say we’ll just get one of the classmates to play. They do not feel this is aproblem.

Cheuk: That’s right. I agree.
Tsang:

But this is a problem. A serious film should not do that. I feel that children playing
adults is the worst. The whole work is problematic this way. I don’t think we shouldaward this kind of film, and thus encourage them to keep doing things this way, as if
they can simply pull the wool over our eyes. Young people should develop stories
based on their own lives, rather than play at being adults.

Cheuk:

But they have a passion for film. Film is their lives.

Wong:

Even though they are not doing it for a living, they want to make a commercial
looking film.

Cheuk:

So they should have a youth playing the role of the father?

Tang:

It seems that many of these works lack independent spirit?

Wong:

Isn’t this kind of blind passion a kind of independent spirit?

Cheuk:

Should we award such blind spirit?

Tsang:

This is worthy of discussion.

Cheuk:

Many of the finalist works have some connection to me. For example, with Rainbow,
I see my grandma almost everyday. And because I see old people everyday, I feelthat this work does not have enough details, and the emotions expressed are notsincere enough. Therefore I was not touched by it. As for Invisible notes, because I
have relatives living in Cheung Chau, I feel this is a portrait of that island. The film
deserves encouragement because the acting of both the male leads is good,
especially the one wearing glasses, and so is the one playing music with the girl.
They have a sincerity and warmth, so that even lines that seem cliché are okay
when uttered by them. I also should mention Red Apple and its connection to mylife. I often go wth my grandma to the market, and have to stand beside her as shechats with the stall owners. Because I spend so much time standing in markets, I
recognize many of the scenes in this film. I appreciate the director’s point of view
7

and ways of seeing. They are simply observing the market, and do not inject
themselves into any situation. Even when they meet the dancing woman, they do
not get involved. Getting that song is quite an achievement.
Wong:

When I was watching it this time, I really noticed how the song is introduced. The
first time I thought things were smooth, but this time I know for sure that it is asoundtrack, and this added soundtrack seems forced.

Cheuk:

I agree. The director’s biggest involvement is when the interviewee asks, “Are you
filming me? Let me show you some vegetables.” This is very purely about the birthof a shot. The works I mentioned are only related to me via some personal
experiences. I won’t give them higher marks because of that.

Wong:

I appreciate the purity of Red Apple. Just now, you mentioned that anyone making
a film about any grandma would yield the same results.

I agree with that. I’ve also

filmed wet markets, and filming at any of them would give you the same effect. I
think both films have similar qualities, but Red Apple is more hardworking and goes
deeper. We do not see the directors having any clear intention when they filmed.
The results are not jarring because they start out with good intentions. The film
captures images as it goes along, but it does not leave a deep impression. I want tomention Molding. Its directorial vision is similar to the sensitivity of the director of
The Boy. However, the flaw of the latter work is that the director tries to tackle asubject that he cannot handle. Because the scale of the film is big, its flaws are
more obvious, while the former completed a work with simple ambitions, but it does
not deliver a very deep message.
Cheuk:

I think the visuals of Molding is stronger, and there are not so many obvious flaws.

Tsang:

I also agree that its visuals are strong and full of tension. I don’t feel that Rainbow
deserve the gold or silver award, but perhaps a special mention. I understand that
he is only filming a journey. I am now living with my grandma and I have filmed her
in the past, and I also focused on everyday details. The director of this film is a
novice who tries to record a relative during a visit, and to him this is an important
experience. I don’t feel that it is worthy of the Gold or Silver award, but you should
consider it for Special Mention.

Kwong: Do you have anything else to add?
Wong:

Not too many people mentioned On the Same Boat

. I also feel that this work is

not too outstanding.
Kwong: I would like to hear why the first round jurors chose this film as one of the finalists?
Chow:

I can provide some information. My original intent was to give more people a chance8to view this work, so that people will know more about the “Equal Share Campaign.”
This is just my personal view. But I also feel that as a documentary, it has its flaws,
just like Rainbow. First of all it is too short, and can only interview the organizer andone or two participants. I would want to know more, such as what the homelesspeople feel. In the same way, I think Rainbow is sincere, and the director reallywanted to record his grandma out of the pureness of heart, and I was touched bythis act.
Cheuk:

It has another strength. The director also interviews his mother, so he is not justinteracting with one person.

Chow:

I would want to know more, like why the grandma likes to sing, the origins of thesong, what she was like when she was young, and under what situations she likes
to sing.

Cheuk:

I think one of the most common problems of the youth category directors is that they
do not know how to ask questions. This is not only the directors asking questions ofother people in their works, but also how the directors ask questions that concern
the theme of their works, and what angle they approach their themes.

Chow:

I would want to know more, such as what work the grandma did in the past. From
her personal history, I expect to learn about history. As a documentary, it has many
flaws.

Cheuk:

Good Riddance

also has the same problem. The director found a very special

store, but didn’t ask any good questions.
Chow:

I agree. The director only interviewed a few people in the store. It should have someregular customers. I would like to hear what they have to say. This store may begone soon, will the regulars miss it? Or do they welcome its closure? I want to know
different sides of the story. I think the outstanding thing about Red Apple is that it isfortunate enough to find many different elements.

Tang:

After hearing what you have to say, I feel that when young people do research andplan for a documentary, they encounter many problems. If they do not know how to
ask questions relating to the theme of the work, it means that they have not properly
digested the topic or captured its essence. This reflects on how young people
undergo the creative process, and how they use media to create. In the same way,
The Boy, Invisible notes and Twin Ice from the perspective of script structure,
show that their directors are still inexperienced in their handling of dramas, andperhaps it’ll take them some years. In terms of handling a character and certain
situations, I see that some works are better and some are worse than others.

Cheuk:

I want to hear what you think about Symbiosis.
9Tsang:

I quite like Symbiosis, because I see almost no experimental films in the first round,or works that use non-realistic imagery. I like the fact that the director tries to tell astory this way. Of course, because it is in a different genre, it is hard to discuss the
film.

Wong:

Usually this kind of competition does not attract many experimental works, so suchworks receive more attention, and tend to be selected. I like the fact that the director
spent a lot of effort in creating the work, but I feel on the whole, it does not work
because there are too many disparate elements.

Chow:

I want to know if you’d read the synopsis. The director wants to explore how modern
media affects our perception of beauty. The content on the wall represents theever-changing content of the media. The mud in the middle represents a person’s
thoughts and inner views. The director wants to show the contrast and interaction
between the two. But when watching this work, I did not get this meaning at all.

Cheuk:

I feel that the director should not state this intention.

Chow:

My feeling is that when viewing a work, a director’s intentions are not the only
possible interpretation. The audience can make up their own minds. However thecontrast between the two elements is interesting, and I like it. Just as Adam said,
this is the only experimental work among the finalists, so it stands out.

Wong:

I feel that many novice experimental filmmakers like to mix in many different
elements, but it does not always work.

Chow:

So if this is the director’s intention, then his execution needs to be improved.

Wong:

Just now we talked about directors raising questions. Red Apple asks a question
many times, “Are you happy?” The tone of this question left me feeling uneasy. My
impression is that these two young girls seem to think on the outset that working ina wet market is something unhappy, so they want the stall owners to find happiness.
I don’t like this part.

Chow:

Its technique has room for improvement.

Wong:

I don’t think that’s a problem, but rather their life experiences and living environment
made them consider wet markets as an unhappy place to work in.

Tang:

I’m not sure if they had met wet market stall owners in the past, or had talked tothem?

Tsang:

I think they only met them that day.
10

Chow:The synopsis mentions that the directors visited wet markets frequently when they
were young, but since then they had moved. They had not visited the market foralmost five years, and are revisiting the place for the film.

Lui:

I’m sorry, but two works have not been much discussed: Invisible notes and Twin
Ice.

Tsang:

Twin Ice is full of youthful spirit, and the girl is quite attractive, while the boy iscomparatively less so. Watching them for the second time, I feel that Twin Ice isbetter than Invisible notes.

Cheuk:The lead characters of Twin Ice are both okay. I don’t know if they are good actors,
or because of the director’s efforts.

I suspect it is the latter. There is a part in the

middle that is like silent movies. This is quite novel.
Wong: The two works are very different. Invisible notes has many different elements, and it
seems that its director really wants to make films or TV dramas, while Twin Ice is a
bit more individualistic.
Cheuk:

It is more free spirited.

Wong:

Because it is more individualistic, it is easier to watch. I like its naturalism andunique humor, the lazy village, fake burglary and even fire truck. Later, when talking
about how he met the girl from the day before, the director uses a wide angle shot.
It is free spirited, and shows the director’s sense of filmic rhythm. He knows when to
involve the audience and when to take a step back. The female lead is quite lovely.
Invisible notes looks very decent, and one can see that the director really wants toconvey a cinematic effect, although the end result is more like TV drama, yet thecontent is not clichéd. When you look at it closely, the content is not cliched at all. It
is not just about love relationships and life goals. I quite appreciate that.

Tsang:

But I can’t accept the part where the character goes blind at the end.

Tang:

I wonder if it is based on a true story or made up?

Wong: I find it a bit cliché, but not completely. Of course you may not accept this story fromthe beginning. I think both the male and female leads are very good. I agree that the
script has holes, but the direction and acting are good, so that the end result is quite
pleasing. Also I find the images of Cheung Chau really beautiful.
Chow:

I think this is a very interesting work. On the surface, Invisible notes tells a clichéd
story about school and life dreams, or the conflict between dream and reality. But at
the end there is a twist, and the older brother’s past made him face this conflict. On
11the whole its technique is quite good, but the music transitions and establishingshots between scenes remind me of TVB dramas. I also like the original song thegirl sings at the end. One of the technical problems is that when the band isrehearsing, the image and background noise is not synched. I don’t have much tosay about Twin Ice. It did not leave a deep impression on me.
Kwong: Can each juror nominate 3 works so that we can concentrate on discussing them?
Tang:

If we each nominate 3 works, does that mean the work with the most nominations
would get the Gold Award?

Kwong: We can discuss that. Just because a work receives a lot of nominations does notmean it is the best work.
Wong:

Either we give Special Mentions to all the works, or not at all. All the works this year
have something worthy, but at the same time are all flawed in their own way.

Kwong: Please start your nomination. You can also nominate fewer than 3 works.
Cheuk:

I still insist on my initial choices: Molding, Symbiosis and Red Apple.

Tang:

I nominate Red Apple, Twin Ice and Molding.

Wong:

I nominate Twin Ice, Molding, and Invisible notes.

Chow:

I nominate Red Apple and Symbiosis.

Tsang:

I nominate 4 works: Molding, Red Apple, Symbiosis and Rainbow.

Kwong: 3 works did not get any nominations. They are The Boy, Good Riddance and On
the Same Boat. Do we agree to exclude them from discussion?
(The jurors agree.)
Kwong:

There are 6 works left. Two works with the most nominations are Red Apple andMolding, both with 4 votes. Symbiosis has 3 votes. Twin Ice has 2 votes, while
Rainbow and Invisible notes each has one vote. Let’s concentrate on discussing
the films with 4 votes, Red Apple and Molding.

Tang:

Can you explain again the criteria for judging? Does a work have to be the best in
every respect or is the best work overall to get the gold award?

Kwong: The Gold Award winner should be the best work overall that year, but each year thejury members have their own criteria for determining the winner. I am mainly
12speaking about the Youth and the Open categories. Aside from the overall quality,
some jury members may feel that in recent years, the quality of screenplays havebeen declining, in their personal opinion, so they would choose a film that hascertain flaws, but has an outstanding screenplay as a show of encouragement. Theinteresting thing about ifva is that jury members can freely make decisions on their
own.
Tang:

With regards to the Youth Category, should we extol certain common qualities?
What quality do we most value? The organizers emphasize independent spirit andcreativity.

Cheuk:

With regards to the gold and silver awards, we should consider the work as a whole.
Judging the work as a whole is very individualistic and subjective. I feel that Red
Apple has its problems.

Tang:

Why is that?

Cheuk:

I agree more and more with what Adam said. The directors did not have very clear
intentions and plans, and just happened to see a dancing woman. The Gold Award
has special meaning, so we should be careful in our choice. I feel the Gold Awardshould go to Molding. The director is clear in what he wants to express. Even
though the message is not too complex, he successfully achieved his goal. This isactually a genre film. With limited resources, there are no flaws and nocringe-worthy shots. The director handled all elements well, and he is well in control.
Even though there is not too much dialogue, the result is good. This film can only bedone by a special type of person.

Tsang:

I like this film because the director performed many roles. For example, he is also
the actor. Its filmic rhythm is very good and precise. Even though it may be a school
production, comparatively speaking, I can see its individuality. Therefore I feel that
Molding is worthy of the Gold Award.

Wong:

I think the director is very talented, and this work is just an initial attempt. I like films
I which the director has the passion to go without sleep for 3 months to finish a film.
From this work, I sense that the director is very talented, and completed this filmwith ease. But I don’t sense the passion and drive.

Tsang:

Which film do you think deserve the Gold Award?

Wong:

I don’t have a choice for Gold Award. I can’t decide.

Tang:

I too have difficulty deciding. The Gold Award winner should be the best work
among the 9 finalists, and embodies the attitude that ifva represents. The finalist
works each has its strengths and flaws. If we cannot agree on a common standard13

of judgment and the quality we wish to promote, then we are simply relying on
personal taste. Therefore coming up with a consensus is difficult.
Cheuk:Is it possible to give two Silver Awards?

Kwong: Yes. Someone suggested Red Apple as Gold Award winner, while someone elsesuggested Molding should win Gold. Someone also suggested two Gold or two
Silver awards.
Cheuk:I am quite clear on my choice. Molding for Gold Award, and Red Apple for Silver,
because the two works are different.

Chow:With regards to Molding, I quite agree with Adam. It is not up to the standard of aGold Award winner, and does not quite show the full capacity of the director. The
work is only 4 minutes long, and could be longer and explored its theme moredeeply. I think the message of the film is too superficial and shallow. It could havebeen more profound. Judging Red Apple by the same standards, it places a pair ofeyes in a market and allows me to understand some things I may be interested in
and inspired me to think about some issues. However, its technique and intention islacking. So it is hard to decide.

Cheuk:Are you leaning towards two Silver Awards?

Tsang:

My personal view is one Gold and one Silver rather than two Silver Awards.

Wong:

I’m leaning towards two Silvers, because the quality of the two films is about thesame.

Kwong: I want to clarify. Aside from Red Apple and Molding, are you not considering otherworks for Gold and Silver Awards? If not, then we’ll concentrate on discussing these
two works. We now have three options. Some suggest giving Molding the Gold
Award and Red Apple the Silver, the second option is two Gold Awards, while thethird is two Silver Awards.
Tang:

I think we can exclude two Gold Awards.

Fan:

Now Cheuk Wan-chi and Jessey Tsang are in favor of one Gold and one Silver.

Chow:

I support two Silver Awards.

Wong:

Me too.

Tang:

I am in support of two Silver Awards also.

14

Kwong: Now there are 3 votes for two Silver Awards, and 2 votes for one Gold and one
Silver. So this is our award distribution for this year. Red Apple and Molding both
get Silver Awards. Now there are 4 works left. Symbiosis has 3 votes, Twin Ice has
2, while Rainbow and Invisible notes each has 1 vote. Please nominate yourspecial mention works.
Cheuk:

I nominate Invisible notes for its male lead.

Wong:

I nominate Twin Ice for its small charms.

Tsang:

I nominate Rainbow for its director.

Cheuk:We are not giving The Boy any encouragement?

Chow:

Symbiosis doesn’t have anything. I nominate Symbiosis.

Tang:

We have to state the quality that we wish to commend for all the Special Mention
Awards?

Lui:

At the award ceremony, the jurors will state what quality they want to commend.

Kwong: In the past, some jurors think that they would rather give fewer Special Mentions,but some feel that giving more is okay.
Cheuk:Can we first put Symbiosis on the list for Special Mention, because it has received
3 votes already.

Kwong: Can you talk about the special quality about Symbiosis that deserves Special
Mention?
Cheuk:

Experimental spirit.

Chow:

Its experimental spirit of expression.

Tang:

I continue my support of Twin Ice.

Wong:

Now we are discussing whether we should give out 4 Special Mentions?

Kwong: That’s right.
Wong:

I support Invisible notes.

Tsang:

I support Rainbow.

15

Chow:

I also support Rainbow.

Wong:

I support giving 4 Special Mentions.

Tang:

I also don’t object to 4 Special Mentions.

Cheuk:

I think it’s a good thing to offer more encouragement.

Kwong: Okay, let me repeat. We have two Silver Awards: Red Apple and Molding, and 4
Special Mentions: Symbiosis, Twin Ice, Invisible notes and Rainbow.

Youth Category
Gold Award
Withhold
Silver Award
Molding / Ng Chak-hang
Red Apple / Lee Wai-yam, Tang Lok-yiu
Special Mention
Invisible notes / Tang Yik-chi, Tang Lok-yiu, Tse Chun-lai, Kwong Wai-shan, Fung Yee-man,
Chan Tsz-him, Cheng Lok-kwan, Cheng Tsz-tim, Wong Wing-chung, Tam Ching-yiu
Rainbow / Law Ho-pui
Symbiosis / Pun Tsz-wai
Twin Ice / Ma Man-ching, Lee Sin-ming, Chan Chun-hong, Chan Leung-yu Kathy, Ho Ka-wai,Gong Ho-ching Rio, Chung Ka-wai, Tsang Ching-yee

16