th17 ifva Open Category Jury Meeting Minutes
Jurors in attendance: Lorna Tee (TEE), Esther Cheung (CHEUNG), Peter Wong (WONG), TeddyRobin (TEDDY), Anthony Wong (ANTHONY)
Representatives from ifva: Teresa Kwong (KWONG), Kattie Fan (FAN)KWONG:

Today we are going to discuss the award recipients for the open category. This
category only accepts works from Hong Kong residents that are over the age of
18 and this year we have received 200 entries. We have no specificrequirement on the work’s genre but it can not be longer than 30 minutes. 3members of our pre-selection jurors watched all 200 entries and selected 50ndentries for the 2 round. Last December, Ann Hui, Peter Wong and Lorna Teewatched all 50 works and selected the 10 finalists that you watched today. Ouremphasis for this festival is independent spirit and creativity. Today we would
need you to pick the 3 award winners for this category. The recipient of theGold award will receive cash prize of $100,000 and a trophy, the recipient ofthe Silver award will receive cash prize of $30,000 and a trophy while therecipient of Special Mention will receive a SONY HD recorder and a certificate.
We will now proceed to discuss The True Story of Ah Poon.

TEE:

After seeing it the second time, I find it somewhat preachy.

CHEUNG:My impression of this work is that its messages are laid out clearly. The father
has a complete collection of works by Lu Xun and is a man of principal. One
can see that the director is very thoughtful in setting up the story but artistically
it is a bit weak. I appreciate the story’s open ending as the father reflects onwhether or not his behavior is appropriate.

WONG:

I suppose the artistic weakness that you mentioned has something to with thenature of the script. The directors show excellent aesthetics with their camera
shot and they display great consistent with their editing as well.

CHEUNG:

I agree. The part that was shot in Tseung Kwan O presents a strong sense of
the city. However, I have some doubts with the part in which the primary school
student submits her writing to the government official for review. I have neverheard of such a thing. I believe the title of the film “The True Story of AhPoon” is derived from Lu Xun’s “The True Story of Ah-Q” so this is not a truestory.

TEDDY:

I find this work professional to some extent; he is able to express his message
even though the technique of storytelling is a bit raw. As a juror, I genuinely
hope to discover the next generation of talent for the film industry and neverintend to be too picky. Technically the directors did an excellent job especiallyin editing but I agree with all of the criticisms that you have made towards thisfilm.

TEE:

I find it a bit too long.

ANTHONY:

I agree with Teddy that this is a complete piece of work with a clear message.
The storytelling, however, is a bit too literal and too straightforward. It is not aspectacular work; for instance, the casting does not make the work more
appealing. It might not be the most creative finalist but it is certainly a very
complete work. It expresses some messages that are not dealt with inmainstream films but the pace of the story seems a bit rushed.

KWONG:We will now proceed to discuss JUSTMAN.

CHEUNG:

This work carries a clear left-wing agenda and it is full of interesting left-wing
symbols, yet this is not my favorite work. Technically the director makes somedecent moves but this work is not as strong as some of the other finalists interms of its depth and impact.

ANTHONY:I think this work is the exact opposite of The True Story of Ah Poon. It isapparent that the director places strong emphasis on artistic direction and thecombination of colors in the opening scene. Yet it is not as clear-cut as The
True Story of Ah Poon and is almost a bit fancy. The exclusive use of
distorted camera shot seems a bit dull.

CHEUNG:

I appreciate the sense of humor that is created by the self-important Justman
but the technique is rather crude. I can see the director tries to leave someclues and implications with the use of editing but the outcome is not convincing.

TEDDY:My issue is that I know where the film is heading very quickly, however I could
sense he is a passionate young filmmaker.

TEE:

I think he could have tried a little harder if he is trying to making a statement.

WONG:

I can see he is trying to create an interesting story.

CHEUNG:

I appreciate the use of inter-media elements in this work, as well as the use ofdramatization and defamiliarization to address young people’s critique onsociety. It is a great idea.

WONG:

When I saw it in the big screen, I had the impression of seeing a cult film.

ANTHONY:The acting of the main actor is rather weak.

CHEUNG:

I think that is precisely what the main actor tries to portray, a weak anti-hero.
And that can be seen as a ridicule to the empty concept of Justman.
Unfortunately the ridicule is not strong enough.

TEDDY:

I believe the director has a future in filmmaking but at the moment he is a bitraw.

KWONG:

We will now proceed to discuss Queen’s Encounter.

TEE:

The leading actor and actress in the film show great chemistry.

CHEUNG:The style of this film reminds me of Before Sunrise featuring Ethan Hawke
and Julie Delpy.

TEDDY:I am big fan of the area where the film was shot; some of its dialogues arequite good but as a whole it does not really stand out.

ANTHONY:I feel it relies too heavily on the characters’ dialogue and that’s too much.

CHEUNG:

Some of the dialogues are a bit dull. A documentary on Wanchai that relies
solely on dialogue inevitably loses some of its emotional appeal.

TEDDY:

This is a thoughtful piece of work. The idea is good with the use of first love topackage the story but it lacks that special touch.

WONG:

I find this work similar to 1+1 in many respect but it is less convincing.

TEE:

I really love the part of Wanchai that was shot in the film.

ANTHONY:But it seems like the film just captures images of the area and talks about it. It
does not leave a strong impression.

KWONG:WONG:

We will now proceed to discuss 1+1.
The relationship between the grandfather and the granddaughter has madethis film that deals with environment conservation so much convincing since
the granddaughter represents the future. The dialogues in general are wellwritten.

TEDDY:

I agree that the dialogues in general are well written and feel comfortable
watching this film even though it is a bit too long.

ANTHONY:I appreciate its acting and the chemistry between the two protagonists.

CHEUNG:

This work has a distinct artistic touch; it addresses many different images andhighlights the poetic nature of the disappearing city. My personal favorite is theturtle. When everyone is walking so fast in the city and someone leaves a turtle
unattended on the street, it has significant symbolic meaning. The planting ofthe tree also carries symbolic meaning whereas the coins represent thelingering memories. The story is told in an attentive and sincere mannerwithout being old-fashioned. The scene in which the grandfather takes thegranddaughter to watch street performance in Mong Kok has the look of adocumentary and adds another artistic layer into the film.

KWONG:

We will now proceed to discuss Meeting of the Half Moons.

CHEUNG:

I find this work very special; it stands out amongst the 10 finalists and I feelrefreshed after watching it. The storytelling is unique as it does not have alinear narrative. The story is based on true events; the depiction of eachcharacter’s inner thoughts presents the various facets of a particular incident.
This work is trying to present different angles of an incident through is narrative.

ANTHONY:The shooting style is professional but I am not entirely convinced by its casting;apart from Carrie Lam, the rest of the cast is rather amateurish and I suspect if
Carrie Lam’s role really needs to be played by a professional actress.

WONG:

I think she does bring out a certain aura in the film.

CHEUNG:The length of the film (20 minutes) and its pace are appropriate; I wascaptivated by the film.

TEE:

I agree with Esther that the film captivates me but it seems somewhat
manipulative and tries to manipulate the audience’s reaction. I suppose it is not
so in line with the independent spirit that we try to promote with this festival.
I have this concern as well. How do we evaluate professionalism andindependent spirit? Should we value one quality over the other?

WONG:

TEDDY:

Technically this is a very professional film with special effect and the use ofcamera shot shows great technique. Since I know the director personally, I
might be biased; I hope you will be not influenced by my opinion.

TEE:

I think this is a quality work except that it is not really in line with independentspirit.

ANTHONY:

I believe the independent spirit is an abstract concept. The images andexecution of this film might be very conventional, but its message and the way
it depicts each character’s innermost thoughts are not very conventional.

CHEUNG:

I see eye-to-eye with Anthony. This film creates a certain expectation for its
audience in the beginning and it appears to be a gangster film. Yet thedevelopment of the story catches everyone by surprise. Even though it is not amasterpiece, I still think that the director does a great job of execution.

TEE:

I really appreciate some of the small scenes in the film and find the director
very thoughtful.

KWONG:

We will now proceed to discuss here, here.

WONG:

I really enjoy seeing this work at the big screen.

TEE:

It does not leave a strong impression on me.

CHEUNG:

I can see the director tries to be creative with the style and by being poetic,such as the broken fridge and the human relationship. He definitely puts a lot ofefforts into his script but the story is a bit hard to follow.

TEDDY:

I can sense the message that he tries to deliver but it is not easy to grasp.

KWONG:

We will now proceed to discuss Intimacy.

CHEUNG:TEDDY:

The film is pleasant and reminds me of another finalist, The True Story of AhPoon. The story is clear with beautiful images and colors. The main actress isvery beautiful as well; the film is thoughtful but as a whole it does not leave astrong impression.
If I have to compare the two films, I would prefer The True Story of Ah Poon.

TEE:I concur.

KWONG:

We will now proceed to discuss The Way Back Home.

TEDDY:

This work is very different from other finalists. It has the look of a documentary
but the director is able to deliver his message.

ANTHONY:

Even judging it as a documentary, this is not an outstanding piece of work.

CHEUNG:The narrative seems rather plain and straightforward; all the interviews aredone with the interviewees facing the camera. I appreciate how the director
records the sound of the wind from Pengjia Islet and it creates a resonancewith the protagonist saying the days are long and the sound of the wind isalmost like a refrain. As a documentary, however, it fails to surprise me.

ANTHONY:

I suppose this is not an impressive piece of work as a documentary. However, I
do feel refreshed while watching it and enjoy seeing the scenery in this film.

TEE:

That is because this is not a film about city; that is its main difference with otherfinalists.

KWONG:We will now proceed to discuss “Wrong Dial”.

TEDDY:

Since I am a close friend of this director, I do not think it is fair for me tocomment on her work.

CHEUNG:

The idea is great; but it is hard to compare this work with other finalists since itis only 4 minutes long. I like the idea of using misunderstanding and dialing thewrong number to discuss intimacy in an implicit manner.

WONG:

It seems rather short and fragmented.

TEE:

I do not think the length of the film is an issue since it depicts a complete story.
The director does not try to over-stretch the story and that actually allows theviewers to reflect on the protagonist’s background.

TEDDY:

Well-made.

WONG:

It is impressive even though it can also be a bit quirky. I do remember all thedialogues after watching it.

CHEUNG:

I agree with Teddy that this is a well-made film.

KWONG:

We will now proceed to discuss the day after a man gone.

WONG:

I actually prefer seeing this film on an iPad over seeing it on the big screen.

CHEUNG:

It does not have a strong sense of being a film.

TEDDY:

There are some positives but there are also many weaknesses as well. It is stillrather raw. I think the 10 finalists are all decent but of course some are better
than others.

TEE:

But none of them really stands out.

KWONG:

Could each of you nominate 3 works for award consideration?

WONG:

I would nominate 1+1, Meeting of the Half Moons and Wrong Dial.

TEDDY:

I would nominate Meeting of the Half Moons, 1+1 and Queen’s Encounter.

CHEUNG:

I would nominate Meeting of the Half Moons, 1+1 and The True Story of Ah
Poon.

ANTHONY:I would nominate 1+1, Meeting of the Half Moons and The True Story of Ah
Poon.

TEE:

I would nominate 1+1, Meeting of the Half Moons and Wrong Dial.

KWONG:

Let’s discuss whether we should have the Gold award this year and if yes, therecipients of the Gold award and the Silver Award.

TEE:

I do not think we should have the Gold award this year. Having been a juror
before, I have to say while the overall qualities of the finalists are decent; I donot see a clear winner for the Gold Award.

TEDDY:My experience is that shooting a film is incredibly difficult and therefore weshould encourage the young people to produce first and foremost. If there is noclear winner for the Gold Award, I would suggest having two winners to share
the Gold Award and the cash prize. I believe even some professionalfilmmakers can not produce films that match the quality of some of thesefinalists.
If we offer them encouragement and recognition, they will continue their artistic
endeavor and continue to improve.

CHEUNG:

I agree with Teddy’s view on offering encouragement. I think we all agree that
1+1 and Meeting of the Half Moons are superior to the other finalists. Theirgenres are different; the ways they embrace independent spirit and try to tackle
social issues are different as well. The former tries to discuss the change ofsociety through a heartwarming story whereas the latter is a genre film that
explores the negotiation process between the film and the audience’s
expectation.

KWONG:First we will decide whether we should have the Gold Award this year.

TEE:

I believe there is no clear winner for the Gold Award this year.

TEDDY:

I believe we should have the Gold Award this year.

CHEUNG:

I would like to have the Gold Award this year.

ANTHONY:I think we can have the Gold Award.

WONG:

I think we can have the Gold Award.

KWONG:

That is 4 against 1. Could each of you nominate the recipient of the GoldAward?

WONG:

I would nominate 1+1 since I like the issue of conservation that it tackles.

CHEUNG:

I would pick both 1+1 and Meeting of the Half Moons since I can not tellwhich is a better film and both of them satisfy my different expectations.

TEDDY:

I would pick both 1+1 and Meeting of the Half Moons as well.

ANTHONY:I would pick Meeting of the Half Moons since it is more complete in many
respects; its shooting style, its storytelling and the many angles of the story that
it is able to present make this the most interesting work amongst the finalists.
The reason why I do not pick 1+1 is that there have been many other works
that deal with the issue of conservation. In that regard, Meeting of the Half
Moons really stands out.

CHEUNG:

Emotionally I prefer 1+1 because its genre and idea really touch me. Rationally,
however, I would pick Meeting of the Half Moons, for the structure of the story
and the discussions of social issues manage to bring me surprises.

KWONG:

Since we do not have a clear consensus, I would like us to have a vote on thisissue. Please raise your hand if you think we should not have the Gold award.

TEE:

I believe we should not have the Gold Award and have 4 recipients for theSilver Award. We should only have the Gold Award when there is a clearwinner.

KWONG:

So there is 1 vote for no Gold Award. How about 1+1 for Gold Award? No one
supports this idea. How about Meeting of the Half Moons for Gold Award?

ANTHONY:

I believe Meeting of the Half Moons deserves to win the Gold Award alone.

KWONG:

1 vote for Meeting of the Half Moons to win the Gold Award. What about
double Gold Award?

CHEUNG, TEDDY, WONG:

We agree to have to 2 recipients to share the Gold Award.

KWONG:We have 3 votes supporting this option, so that means we will have 2recipients for the Gold Award this year: 1+1 and Meeting of the Half Moons.
Could each of you nominate a film for the Silver Award?

TEE:

I would nominate Wrong Dial.

ANTHONY:I would pick The True Story of Ah Poon.

WONG:

I would pick Wrong Dial.

CHEUNG:

I think Wrong Dial should receive Special Mention and The True Story of Ah
Poon is not my cup of tea so I do not have a pick for the Silver Award.

TEDDY:

I would pick both The True Story of Ah Poon and Wrong Dial.

KWONG:

There are 2 votes for Wrong Dial and it will receive the Silver Award. Now
please nominate a film for Special Mention.

TEDDY:

I would pick The True Story of Ah Poon since it is very complete andprofessional; I think it is better than the rest of the finalists.

ANTHONY:I would pick The True Story of Ah Poon as well.

CHEUNG:

I originally pick Wrong Dial for Special Mention but since it has alreadyreceived the Silver Award. I do not have a pick for Special Mention.

WONG:

I would pick The True Story of Ah Poon for its distinct aesthetics.

KWONG:

There are 3 votes for The True Story of Ah Poon and it will receive theSpecial Mention. To recap the Gold Award will be shared by 1+1 and Meetingof the Half Moons, the Silver Award goes to Wrong Dial and the Special
Mention goes to The True Story of Ah Poon.

Open Category
Gold Award1+1
LAI Yan-chi, Mo
Meeting of the Half Moons
NG Ho-yin
Silver AwardWrong Dial
CHEUK Wan-chi
Special Mention
The True Story of Ah Poon
TSIM Ho-tat, SUEN Ching, LAM Hon-fung, CHAK Hoi-ling