thThe 15 ifva Youth Category Jury Meeting Transcript

Jurors in Attendance: Adam Wong Sau Ping (WONG), Kwok Chi Kin (KWOK), Or Sing Pui (OR),
Bottle Shiu Ka Chun(SHIU), Chan Wing Chiu (CHAN)
Organizer Representatives: Teresa Kwong (KWONG)KWONG:

The first work we will be discussing is Where.

OR:

I think the works in this category are different from that of previous years;
perhaps times have changed. Nowadays many schools have media related
courses. This has advantages and disadvantages. The good thing is thateverybody knows how to make films, but that is different from having a passion
for it.

KWOK:

I see a lot of works that were made because the filmmakers had to.

OR:I’ve observed the same thing. Some filmmakers were encouraged by theirseniors in school, which is an interesting phenomenon.

KWOK:

A few of the works like Some Another Days and Story of Our Tuck Shop areschool assignments.

KWONG:

As far as I know, ANA was made as an entry into a workshop called Focus on
Film.

OR:

Compared to other works, this one pays a great deal of attention to production
elements such as costumes and design.

KWONG:

Where.

KWOK:

This work is closer in spirit to that of yesteryears when Or Sing Pui was a jury
member. The director is definitely a film buff. There are many elements that weretaken from other films, but the camera work and editing are superb, all thescenes are well thought out. It was made with little money, and all the actors
were fellow classmates. The filmmaker is very talented, as evidenced in his useof repeated shots, actors and camera movements. He is obviously very muchinto film. I heard the film was made in two months, before he had to sit for Alevels exams. The director is very keen and hard working. It is clear that he has
definite ideas and concepts, and is able to put his ideas into practice.

OR:

In the past student films were mostly about love or friendship. Lately there havebeen more suspense films—perhaps that is more trendy nowadays. Even though
this work is sometimes imitative, one can see that the director has made theeffort to think through the genre.

SHIU:

This director’s ideas about life, death, murder and suicide is clearly different fromother people. He is quite a unique individual. I imagine his life is probably very
closed-in, and he lives in his own world, because he finds his world is richenough. Even though there are places where the story does not make sense, it
doesn’t really matter.

CHAN:

I think it’s interesting that we chose three works with similar themes; they are allabout exams and academic ranking, etc., which reflects the current situation thatstudents face. It is almost as if they are protesting against the education system.

Many of them make films in fulfillment of academic obligations, but their subject
mater has to do with academic pressure, which is very interesting.
KWOK:

The 6th Step is also about grades.

CHAN:

Because they cannot see a way out of it, they escape into another world. Where
uses the suspense genre, Breath is supernatural, while The 6th Stepis areligious film.

KWONG:

Sau Ping, you have been on the jury team of other youth video festivals. Are theirentries similar to this competition or are they different?

WONG:

Very different. Exploration of Time was an award winning film in anothercompetition. The film is very cliched in terms of its subject matter and style. I
think many of the other competitions want to “borrow” the glamour of films. For
example, the award presentation ceremony would employ the theme music fromthe Hong Kong Film Awards, and they would invite well known actors to present
the awards. Their selection criteria follow the same vein. They prefer works thatare nice and safe; you won’t find any experimental or subversive films in thesecompetitions.

KWONG:

So you can see more unique films in ifva’s Youth Category?

WONG:

Recently I finally met the filmmakers behind the primary school entry 和你在一起. I found out the production team was lead my the school campus channel
instructor.

KWONG:The entry is from Holy Family Canosian Primary School. The work is one in aseries of music videos, the songs of which are obviously no chosen by thestudents. The production teams are lead by teachers.

WONG:

These works look smooth and professional, just like commercials. The technician
told me they are under a lot of pressure from the school to produce these works.
The last time they received an award with one of their videos, and so theywanted to produce more works like that. Many video competitions targeted atyoung people really like this type of works.

KWONG:The next one is We Sing We Sing.

CHAN:

If this one wins an award I will personally present them with it.

SHIU:

I was not going to attend the ceremony, but if this one wins it, I will go. Even
though there is a lack of main theme, its energy and sense of joy is rare to see.
The girls are so crazy that watching them brings back the feeling of first love.

OR:

As a film this work is not up to par, but it possesses a child-like silliness that
captures youthful memories.

KWONG:Is this done for homework?

CHAN:

It was done for ifva. They will be 18 next year, and wanted to qualify for thiscategory this year.

KWOK:

It is a very youthful work. It is rough on the edges and the sound is bad.

OR:

The shots are out of focus. They just take the camera and film whatever comesto mind.
KWOK:

And it’s too long. But I was touched by a few of the scenes. Like singing George
Lam’s songs on the ferry, that brought me goose bumps. The other scene thatmoved me was the one in which they sing on the MTR. The choice of song wasgood, and expresses the feeling of “just doing it.” When I was young I once
walked six hours from Tuen Mun to Tsuen Wan. When I saw this film it broughtback the feeling of being in love for the first time. This film is representative inthat people assume that young people of this generation only like to playelectronic games and go online. In fact there are people like these girls in every
generation, but they don’t get the attention, just like there are things we noticed in
the past that people ignore nowadays. There are still people who do silly things
like playing guitar at the ferry terminal, then film the process and edit the footage
together. This is what I find so special about this film.

WONG:

It’s an innocent, spontaneous work.

CHAN:

I feel inspired by the film. I discovered that you shouldn’t watch it on the TV
screen. Seeing it on the big screen is a lot more powerful. Even though it is
unpolished, you feel the work is trying to talk to you. I can’t help but think that wehave so many preconceived ideas about films made by young people. We should
really humble ourselves and invite more of these works to enter the competition.

KWONG:The next work is Some Another Days.

OR:

I find it quite impressive. Even though it’s a music video, it really communicatesthe feeling of indolence. However there are just feelings. The work lacks
something else. The images are pretty, but lack depth.

WONG:

It expresses the director’s artistic sense in a simple way.

OR:

Even without the music, the images still expresses certain feelings. Its editing
technique is better than the other works.

WONG:

It looks unpretentious and effortless.

OR:

The director doesn’t plan every shot, but tries to capture various things. The
whole video consists simply of a girl at different locations—she wears the same
clothes throughout and doesn’t even change costumes.

KWOK:

At the post-screening discussion just now, the director refused to explain themeaning behind the work. From her intuitive camera style, you can tell she isquite talented.

KWONG:The next work is Breath.

WONG:

The use of stop motion is very good and inspired.

OR:

It ends with a shot of someone taking a breath, which is quite humorous. The
work is short, like a commercial.

WONG:

This film is short and sweet. There’s not much one could criticize about. It is acomplete and powerful work.

KWONG:The next one is The 6th Step.

KWOK:

I think it’s okay. The supernatural scenes are quite interesting. The technique isgood. Did they use a smoke machine? Perhaps they received funding from thechurch.

WONG:

It’s not just a gospel film. It doesn’t let itself be dictated by those kinds ofimagery. People like this aren’t the type to make gospel films.

KWONG:The next one is 我的回憶不是我的.

KWOK:

I want to ask why this film was selected?

SHIU:

We had a long argument about this one. I think this work is clever and effective.

CHAN:

I agree with you on the cleverness. I find the work adheres closely with its subject
matter, and it gave me a strong feeling when I watched it.

KWOK:

Watching old videos is the most clichéd way of recalling old memories. When I
watched this I felt detached for some reason, even though it is somewhat
interesting.

CHAN:

Nowadays many student works like to talk about the self. Both Some AnotherDays and this one emphasizes this aspect.

OR:

Usually the teachers urge them to make films about themselves.

CHAN:

Three of Us is like that too, although the results are quite different.

WONG:

My comment is: “a great deal of emotions but not a lot of creativity.” This type ofwork is easy to overlook. It tries to experiment with something, and if it succeeds
in doing what or suggests, it would be very successful. It is very economical, with
only a little bit of creativity. If it falls short by just a little, I would have missed it
altogether. What I see is a lot of self indulgence and emotions, but not a lot ofcreativity. I don’t dislike the work, though.

KWOK:

I don’t have very strong feelings about this film, perhaps because I’ve done too
many similar works in the past.

KWONG:

Three of Us.

KWOK:

It is a lot like 我的回憶不是我的, but Three of Us is very successful in portraying
the personal self, particularly in terms of technique and the objects the camera
captures, like the sofa and cooking a meal, etc. I like the part where the director
uses telephone-like voice, but you don’t hear the grand father’s reaction or reply,
and also his use of self narration. As a piece of homework it is very high quality.

SHIU:

I can’t believe that it is a piece of homework. He proudly lets you into his life, andI can really see what the director is like, and also his love of the work.

KWOK:

It has the rare quality of being intricate and humorous, which is not easy to do.

WONG:

It is very sincere work in which the director tells his own story in an unpretentious
way. The technique merges seamlessly into the work. For example, in the scene
where the grandfather laughs, the camera shakes along with his movements as iflaughing along with him. He incorporates these things into the work in an honestway.

CHAN:

This year there has been a lot of work from Lee Shau Kee School of Creativity.
What you said is spot on. Many works from this school play with form, and theresult is often vacant. Yet this work is also from Lee Shau Kee, which shows that
their students are in fact quite varied. It does not matter if this is a piece of
homework, as long as it comes from the heart.

KWONG:

Destructive Love.

KWOK:

In what way is this work representative?

WONG:

To a certain extent I am being charitable toward this work. I think the sense ofsolidarity and passion behind the making of this film ought to be applauded. Thisfilm is no worse than a lot of the other “disaster films”, but I like the fact that they
had fun doing it. They express themselves wholeheartedly and unabashedly,
which I think deserves to be encouraged.

CHAN:

The rap at the end is important, because it is representative of this generation.
Even when they do their homework they would work in a rap. I really got a kickout of watching this film, and I think it deserves to be among the finalists. It is ashow piece that allows us a glimpse into how the new generation thinks. Whenwatching this film you have to turn the sound down a notch, otherwise even thesoothing parts would have the opposite effect.

KWOK:

This work is quite special. Its intention is very serious, but it is clear that theirability falls short. It is precisely because they try so hard that it is funny. You feel
you shouldn’t laugh but you can’t help it.

CHAN:

I think their energy deserves encouragement. This school has produced a lot ofworks, which needs to be recognized. It’s not just this year—every year there arefilms like this, so we need to show them. They have a lot of fun making it and theenergy comes through in the work.

OR:

The production value is high. They even have a car crash.

WONG:

It talks about ugly girls in a way that is not clichéd, even though it is not original.

KWONG:

Exploration of Time.

KWOK:

This is a strange work that is half way between being serious and playing around.
All of a sudden there are spirits and time travel. The acting style is part Stephen
Chow, part Ronald Cheng, but the voice-over uses a sentimental tone. The
overall feeling is schizophrenic. The editing in the latter part is very precise, but
the beginning part is all wrong.

CHAN:

I think it is probably a collaboration between teachers and students. Perhaps weneed to have a separate category for that next year. You sense that it isobviously done by two groups of people, and not by the students themselves.
The thinking behind the work and the technique is very grown-up.

OR:

I don’t think it’s a collaboration. Probably the teacher instructed them.

CHAN:

The end credits states frankly that they thank the church for support and theteachers’ guidance. The entrant is the main actor, but he is not the director.

WONG:

It is hard to tell whether it is done by teachers or students. Getting guidance from

teachers is a good thing. Many of the “disaster films” would have benefited fromsome professional help. How can we judge whether a film is truly a student work?
CHAN:

The most important consideration is that this is the Youth Category.

KWONG:

Story of Our Tuck Shop.

KWOK:

A very good film. Very anti-establishment and full of humor. For example the line
“super expensive” is funny, and so are the subtitles. Was this film guided byteachers?

CHAN:

For sure it was, but it went beyond that guidance, which is wonderful.

KWONG:

ANA.

KWOK:

This is a Hollywood production among Youth Category entries—there areWestern actors and the production value is high. It is also a meaningful film. But
there is nothing outstanding about it; the film has no personality. In terms ofcreativity there is nothing very exciting about it. It’s just like a big budget
Hollywood film.

WONG:

It is not clichéd, and is nice and safe.

OR:

Well rounded. The lead actress is very pretty.

WONG:

Her acting is good, too.

CHAN:

A very professional work dealing with a very serious subject matter.

WONG:

It is unpretentious; you don’t feel that it tries to be grown-up.

CHAN:

It stresses that all the cast and crew are under the age of 18.

SHIU:

It has no rough edges, obviously done by people who don’t have to worry about
where their next meal is coming from.

KWONG:

Now we can nominate award winners, or go straight to picking the Gold Awardwinner.

OR:

We can pick 5 each.

WONG:

I choose Where, The 6th Step, Three of Us, Exploration of Time and Story of
Our Tuck Shop.

SHIU:

I choose Where, We Sing We Sing, Breath, Three of Us and Story of Our
Tuck Shop.

CHAN:

I choose Where, We Sing We Sing, Breath, Three of Us and Story of Our
Tuck Shop.

KWOK:

I choose Where,We Sing We Sing, Three of Us, Story of Our Tuck Shop and
The 6th Step.

OR:

I choose Where, We Sing We Sing, Some Another Days, Three of Us andStory of Our Tuck Shop.

KWOK:

Where should get the Gold Award.

OR:

I am torn between Where and Three of Us. One is about school pressure, while
the other is about the director’s family. They represent two different styles.

SHIU:

I’m more sentimental, and prefer Three of Us.

CHAN:

I also agree that Three of Us should either get Gold or Silver. Where istechnically superior, but the director gets carried away. It wants to tell a story
about someone who may have seen a ghost, then he sees his classmate commit
suicide, but it turns out to be himself. In the process the story does not quite
make sense.

KWONG:

Are these the only contenders for the Gold Award?

CHAN:

You can consider We Sing We Sing, but you might feel that it is not technicallyup to standard.

SHIU:

Giving it the Gold Award is a bit too much.

WONG:

As Youth Category jury members we have certain expectations about the work,and hope to see in them what young people are like and their youthful spirit. But
for myself I don’t emphasize this too much.

KWOK:

I agree. Before I saw Dreams, I gave Three of Us very high marks, but theformer has more self awareness. I think young people are often too lackadaisical,
and do not know what they want. Even though the director of Dreams is only 18,
he really knows what he wants. Chan Wing Chiu thinks he got lost telling hisstory, but the director has a cohesive vision and really knows what he wants toexpress. Technically the film is stylish and possesses the innocence of youth at
the same time. His first shot is repeated in the end, and very few teenagers
would think like that. I think entries from the Youth Category should not only
express young people’s energy, but also their dreams. I am not sure if this work
is homework, but I don’t think it looks like the director is accountable to anyone.

CHAN:

From the beginning we use filmmaking technique and style to critique Dreams,
because it aims at finding the very spirit of cinema, and the director tries his very
best to make this film. It is also about youth problems and complaints against
society. I applaud the director’s persistence in making his film, in this day andage that’s rare.

WONG:

To me the subject matter is not important, but I would pay attention to his use offilm language and his mastery of the medium. Many Open Category entries are
too much influenced by conventional film language, and therefore you see tracesof other films in them. Even though this work is also influenced by other films, italso has elements of theatre. Its use of space is clever, and the story is coolly
constructed without the use of dialogue, which requires a great deal of will power
and passion. We Sing We Sing is also done with a lot of passion, but thedirectors are more casual in their approach. The director of Dreams does not
express his passion through his film, but uses his passion to accomplish acomplex goal, which in itself is a very youthful approach.

OR:

I don’t expect Youth Category entries to have groundbreaking technique. For me
the hard work the director of Dream put into his work to explore film language is abonus. Three of Us does not need technique, because its sentiment overrides
everything else. From Dreams I detect a passion towards film. I am torn—sentimentally I prefer Three of Us, because I have never been affected by scary
movies.
CHAN:

Should we give out two Gold Awards?

SHIU:

Three of Us moved me, whereas Dreams did not. However Dreams has a sortof sophistication in terms of its content, technique and use of film language. The
director succeeds in mastering his subject, which is not easy.

WONG:

Even if you take Dreams outside of the context of the Youth Category, it is still aremarkable work. Three of Us moved me too, but there is nothing innovative
about it. Actually Three of Us has good technique as well, and it successfully
blends emotions with technique. The feelings it explores are genuine, and thestory is told well. The pictorial composition is well designed, for example in thescene where the grandfather appears on one side of the screen and the
grandmother appears in another, which I really appreciate.

CHAN:

I am leaning towards giving Dreams the Gold Award, because it is rare for
Youth Category entrants to put art at the forefront of their works. In the past we
have always been concerned whether young people have independent mindsets
and if they care about society. This work should be lauded for being artisticallydistinguished, because after all this is a media competition. Since this work issuch a rare achievement, it should get the award.

OR:

I agree. This work does not only have youthful energy, but is also intelligent.

KWONG:

So our Gold Award winner for the Youth Category this year is Dreams, andSilver Award winner is Three of Us. How about special mentions? We Sing We
Sing, Story of Our Tuck Shop, Breath and The 6th Step all received highvotes.

CHAN:

I suggest giving four special mention awards.

KWONG:

Please keep the results of the deliberations secret until the award presentation
ceremony. Also I invite you to be award presenters at the ceremony. Thank youvery much.

Youth Category
Gold Award
Where
Ho-nin MAK, Ko-nin MAK

Silver Award
Three of Us
Wing-yee WONG
Special Mention
We Sing We Sing
Hiu-laam CHANG, Chor-man HO

Special Mention

BreathKwong-san TANG, Chun PANG

Special Mention
The 6th Step
Chun-ki CHEUNG, Yik-fung WONG

Special Mention
Story of Our Tuck Shop
Tin-yui PANG