20th ifva Open Category jury meeting minutes
Jury members: Nansun Shi (Shi), Yau Ching (Yau), Chang Tieh-chih (Chang), Vincent Chui (Chui),Mabel Cheung (Cheung)ifva representatives: Kattie Fan (Fan), Wa Choi (Choi)
Fan:

Thank you for attending this meeting. The goal of this meeting is to select the Gold,
Silver and Special Mention winners. You can reference the meeting agenda, whichlists the various prizes for each award. The Gold Award winner will get a cash prizeof HK$50000 and a chance to attend an overseas film festival, a G-SPEED Studio 24
TB Hard-disk, a Black Magic Cinema Camera and a trophy. The Silver Award winner
will get a cash prize of HK$30000, a 12TB hard disk and a trophy. In the past, Special
Mention winner only gets a certificate. This year, the winner will receive a 12TB harddisk given by a sponsor.

Shi:

Is there only one winner for each award? If we all agree, can we have two Gold
Award winners?

Fan:

This had happened before in the past. Should this become the case, we will have no
Silver Award winners. We can discuss the distribution of awards later. in othercategories this year, we have no Gold Award and two Silver Awards. If there are noGolds, then we should issue a statement to explain why. The distribution of awards
can be adjusted within limits. I suggest that you discuss the 10 finalist works one by
one first, and express how you feel about them, and then nominate the various awards.
Do you have any questions? If not, we will start with the first work, Land Sickness.

Shi:

This is an interesting work, but many of its technical aspects are uneven. I don’t think
I will nominate it for any awards.

Cheung:

I agree with Nansun. Its CG effects are too removed from reality and too playful.

Chui:

I don’t have much to say about it.

Chang:

It’s uneven and a bit chaotic.

Fan:

Do you have anything to add?

Yau:

I wrote a critique about it during the first round, so I have pointed out its good points
and bad in detail. I want to say that on the whole, this work is quite special among themore than 50 works in the first round because most narrative films are even andtechnically more accomplished, while this work is more unusual. It is more original
and its idea more creative than other works. It uses a unique way to depict andconnect Hong Kong history, linking together many different issues such as Mazu
temple, Cheung Po Tsai, Kwong Ying fishing boat, these conversations are rare inother places in Hong Kong, and I find these things interesting. As for the production,
CG, execution and acting, there is a lot of room for improvement.

Shi:

By the way, the sound and image are out of sync. Is this a technical issue?

1

Yau:

Yes. Both films have the same problem. I didn’t deduct any marks when I watchedthem on DVD because I thought the problem was with my DVD player. But seeing it
again this time, the problem is very obvious.

Shi:

Is it a problem with the projection?

Yau:

No.

Chui:

It’s a voice re-dubbing issue.

Yau:

His Hong Kong will be destroyed after 33 years also has out of sync issues.

Shi:

His other work has the same problem, which led me to believe that it was a problem
with the projection.

Yau:No, the two works are by the same director. The other works do not have the same
issue.

Shi:

The two films are made by the same director?

Cheung:Is it a post-production or monitoring issue? They only have to adjust it slightly to put
things in sync.

Shi:

That’s right. The problem is easy to solve.

Yau:This film was post-dubbed.

Shi:

It could still be fixed now.

Yau:

I think maybe he doesn’t mind that both works have this problem.

Shi:

The problem could easily be solved, so why didn’t he do it? It’s quite disturbing.
When the volume is loud, the problem is even more obvious.

Choi:

If the problem is with the sound effect, then maybe it has to do with the projection.

Fan:

We will check it again. You know when they transfer into DCP, this problem caneasily arise when you go from 25 to 24 fps. We did a color grading for all 10 finalist
works, and mistakes could arise in the process. Today the jury members saw out test
copy. We will follow up the issue with the production house.

Yau:

I want to know about the color grading. Are the directors and cinematographerspresent?

Fan:

Yes.

Cheung:

So you didn’t do it for them?

Fan:

No.

2

Shi:

Each of the works has a colorist. Some of them even spelled the name wrong.

Yau:

What I mean is, the color grading is not done by the colorist alone, but under thesupervision of the whole production team. Therefore, the color grading should be aconsideration in judging the works.

Shi:

That’s right.

Fan:

You can say that.

Choi:

All the directors were present at the color grading of their works.

Shi:

It is rare for a colorist to work on a film by himself.

Yau:

Because it’s being paid for by ifva.

Fan:

We don’t have to pay. It’s sponsored. This opportunity is offered to all ten finalists,
who got the opportunity to do color grading at PO. The colorist at PO dealt directlywith the filmmakers.

Chui:

Do you make one DCP out of the 10 finalist works?

Fan:

They are all separate. Each of the 10 finalist works had a DCP made.

Cheung:PO is also responsible for the sound?

Fan:

PO is not responsible for the sound. The sound came with the works themselves.

Cheung:

The filmmakers were responsible for the sound mixing?

Fan:

That’s right.

Shi:

I agree that the work is creative, but the problem is that it is uneven.

Yau:

When I saw it the first time, I felt that the director must have rushed to finish it for thecompetition. It looks like a rough cut.

Cheung:He spent most of his efforts on Hong Kong will be destroyed after 33 years.

Shi:

The idea behind that work is also uneven, which created a lot of barriers for theaudience.

Yau:

The reason I said it is rushed is because I think he didn’t adequately prepare before
going into production. The Mazu is really…

Cheung:Hong Kong will be destroyed after 33 years is better in this regard. Is it because hefocused all his energies on this film, and neglected to improve upon Land Sickness?

3

Shi:

The idea behind Hong Kong will be destroyed after 33 years is very good, but it is
not as ambitious as this work, which is more challenging.

Yau:

He finished Hong Kong will be destroyed after 33 years first. I remember that there
was heated discussion about this film on the internet.

Fan:

Hong Kong will be destroyed after 33 years did go viral. But I’m not sure which
work was completed first.

Yau:

Perhaps it was due to the hundreds of thousands of views for Hong Kong will be
destroyed after 33 years that led to the making of Land Sickness.

Fan:

If there is nothing to add, then we move on to Why Don’t We Share Our Solitude.

Chui:

Let me comment on it first, since I was responsible for critiquing it. Among thenarrative films, this one is the most even. It’s not too outstanding. I saw it again on
the big screen today. As a short film, its story development at the beginning is too
matter-of-course. If it was a feature film, the character depiction would have been
more detailed, which would make it better. The climax at the end was well-delivered.
On the whole, its various aspects including acting is average,

Cheung:I should declare my interest. It was a Fresh Wave film, and I served as the mentor on
this project. I helped out with the script and casting, as well as taught the director on a
few sessions. However, I never read the whole script, and only viewed a few scenes.
Watching the film now, I feel it’s better than I expected. The actors are quite good on
the whole, and the teacher acted well. The actors who played bad students were quite
natural.

Yau:

That’s right, the bad students’ acting was quite natural.

Shi:

Secondary school students nowadays are so foul-mouthed?

Yau:

I think probably primary school student are like that.

Shi:

I agree with Vincent. This is an even-keeled work, and achieves what it sets out to do.
The casting is good, and made the film more convincing. This is a mature work, but
the acting lacks creativity.

Chui:

That’s right. The film has a sense of continuity, and all the elements are in the right
direction.

Shi:

Many aspects are very good, including the technical aspects and direction…

Chui:This is the kind of new director you should discover.

(Jury members laugh.)Shi:

It would be better if she was a bit more forthright.

4Chui:

That’s right. She is a bit reticent. The ending looks like it could be continued later.

Cheung:The original story is not like that. The name of that character is the same as his
mother, so there is a bit of Oedipus complex involved. He really wants her to become
his mother. But the version now is that he finds another girlfriend.

Shi:

It could be a bit more passionate. Now it is an average and even-keeled work.

Fan:

Do you have anything to add? If not, we move on to Healthy – Not?

Shi:

Yau, were you responsible for writing all the critiques?

Yau:

No, we divided up the work. We are each responsible for some of the films.

Chui:

We really enjoyed the writing.

Cheung:

The depiction of the blind person is very well. I think it may be based on a real story.
The blind parents are not taken for granted, and the child does not feel that there isanything lacking in her life. At first I thought the film would be like Les Misérables,
but it ends up being quite cheerful.

Yau:

That’s right.

Cheung:

You can see that the girl is trying very hard to say her lines. For her the lines are too
difficult.

Yau:

It is rare to see blind actors in Hong Kong film or television, which is different fromthose with normal eyesight acting blind. The sense of realism is interesting. Whenwatching it one may feel they are very exaggerated, but that is not in fact the case.
They are really acting out themselves. They do not view themselves as others view
them, but as themselves viewing themselves. This work is moving in that it gives theactors room to express themselves.

Cheung:I wonder if they are the parents of the director?

Yau:

I think so.

Cheung:Perhaps that’s why their acting is so natural.

Yau:

I think the photo of the girl that appears at the end of the film is of the director herself.

Cheung:I did not assume that. Some directors like to appear at the end of their films as a wayof acknowledgement.

Chui:

But in the picture they are hugging each other.

Yau:

I have a feeling that they are the director’s parents. It does say that the film is basedon a true story.

5

Shi:

It doesn’t matter. We are not going to award her a prize based on whether or not they
are her parents. I just wanted to know out of curiosity.

Chui:

I feel that in terms of execution and filming, the work is a bit chaotic. I understandthat directing blind people and placing them within the camera frame can be difficult,but the director does not use handheld camera throughout the film, so that in the
middle…The story is okay and I understand what it is trying to accomplish, but theexecution is inadequate. She is someone who has close contact with blind people, but
the acting fails to deliver her goals. For example, the scene where they arerehearsing…

Yau:

That is the weakest part.

Chui:

She should have been able to create something completely unique…But now what she
has accomplished is simply another type of criticism.

Yau:

That’s right. I think the young actor’s performance is weak. He criticizes others for
not having close contact with blind people, but how is his acting different from theway blind people are usually portrayed? I don’t know the answer to that. Among theten finalist works, this one is the weakest in terms of cinematography. Many of its
camera movements are unmotivated. You don’t understand why some shots are
handheld, and some are on a tripod. There is also the problem of being out of focus.

Shi:

This is due to our expectations about blind people. Much of the film is nice to watch,even though it does have technical issues. I enjoyed watching this film.

Yau:

I applaud it for its courage. We should encourage more films about this subject, eventhough there is a lot of room for improvement for this film.

Chang:

Watching this film on the big screen alongside Why Don’t We Share Our Solitude, I
like this one better, because it captures the right atmosphere. The director accurately
conveys what she is trying to say. I agree with Vincent that we understand what it istrying to do, but the execution and acting is a bit crude and not too mature.

Fan:

Alright. The next one is The Woman Security Guards.

Cheung:

I quite like this film. It is well-rounded, and the cinematography is very good. The
actress who plays the woman security guard is very good and natural.

Chui:

Which one?

Cheung:

The more heavy-set one, Koo.

Yau:

Koo? I also think…

Shi:

Why did they choose the other one? The film went through a casting process…

Chui:

The other one is really a security guard in real life. In the last scene she is really on
her way to work. I don’t know if I have to declare interest, because I had no direct6dealings with the directors. I have seen the work before, and I asked the director about
the last scene, and whether or not she is actually going to work. She really is asecurity guard.
Shi:

It is one of the biggest responsibilities of the director.

Cheung:She is only a little bit off.

Shi:

Not just a little bit.

Cheung:

You can assume that she is a person who does not speak very well.

Shi:

You can’t say that, because playing a person who does not speak well also requires acertain technique.

Chui:

That’s right, it could have been treated better. The middle section is problematic, but
the rest is okay.

Yau:

I don’t think the middle section has problems. Rather, the ending cannot carry thesense of weight. The actors behind the glass cannot express the heaviness that thecharacters feel at the end.

Cheung:

The fact that she has a job, but don’t know whether she should feel happy or sad.

Yau:

Exactly. I don’t know what’s going on with her, and she needed to convey that withher facial expressions. The director is too ambitious, and does not achieve what he set
out to do. Yet had watched over 50 works in the first round, and this was my favorite.
I should declare interest. I know Fredie because he had interviewed me. I only
realized he is the director of this film after watching the whole thing. He made a film
about a very important line of work in Hong Kong, which is not just about the
problems that the character encounters, but about the grassroots class and theiremployment issues. At the same time, h depicts the world from their point of view.
What they face is far more than we can ever imagine. Because he had done his
research, he is able to depict this profession in a convincing way, which is very good.

Chang:

I also like this work a lot. In addition to your point about the character’s perspective, I
feel that the film has a very complete structure. I also feel that if a work has good
cinematography, it makes it better. This film has outstanding cinematography, whichadds to what the filmmakers try to express.

Yau:

I was pleased with this film’s cinematography, and the tracking shots are beautiful.
Obviously the film has a limited budget, and can’t do very good steady camera shots,
but on the whole it is well done.

Cheung:

The night time atmosphere is quite well-portrayed. I can get a sense of realism fromthe shots of these security guards who work at night.

Yau:That’s right. You only see shots like that in Hong Kong films. Almost all the scenes
use existing lighting, like the playgrounds at night. Only Hong Kong is so brightly lit

7

at night, and you don’t need to film with any additional lighting. Just these scenes
alone is very atmospheric.
Cheung:I can sense their loneness, like the Beatles song Eleanor Rigby, “Look at all the lonely
people…” In this prosperous city there are a few female security guards. They evenget blamed by their sons. The film really evokes a certain feeling.

Yau:

The film’s editing is quite good. Usually works like these would have certain flaws,
but the parallel editing of the two women talking on the phone in the middle section isquite complete. The ending could be better.

Shi:

I think the casting is its biggest flaw, and the rest are very good.

Fan:

The next work is Rest Is Pending.

Shi:

I’m not too fond of it. I can’t understand why Chin Siu Ho’s acting style is so odd. I
think the film’s rhythm is awful. I don’t know if it’s…

Cheung:Is it a period piece?

Shi:

I don’t know what kind of rhythm it is. It does not move forward, nor does it stay put.
I can’t call it slow—it does not matter if it’s slow. The rhythm is just weird. Chinlooks like he’s acting in The Lunatics, and I don’t like that. At first I had high hopes
for this kind of subject, and it could have been outstanding in many respects.

Chui:

In the first round, we chose this film because of its subject matter. Watching it again, I
feel I don’t care about the characters it portrays. It does not bother to build up thecharacters, but simply unveil their situation.

Cheung:

It is not very good, and is completely unconvincing.

Shi:

It’s a choice that you have to make. The actor and director should have discussed how
to portray this character and made a decision, but the treatment now is odd. I don’t
feel sad for them, but only feel that they are weird and unusual. The same with therhythm.

Yau:

I feel it’s not just a problem with the cast, but the entire production team. The stylingand character design of the actors made me not want to sympathize with them.

Shi:

Its production design is very self-conscious. The sense of ‘beauty’ that it’s after had
the opposite effect.

Yau:

In the first round we debated whether to include it among the finalists. In the end, we
feel that this is an important issue in Hong Kong. If someone were able to portray thissubject matter well, it could have been very useful.

Shi:

The subject matter is undeniably very good.

Cheung:

It manages to show many strange columbaria.

8

Yau:

There is a lot of room for depicting the family relations behind this issue. The father
alone in the house could have developed into something more.

Shi:

They wasted this topic.

Fan:

Is that it for Rest Is Pending? We move on to YATRI.

Chui:

I quite like this work. Compared to other narrative works, I don’t know whether thisis a narrative film. The film is simple, with simple characters. The world it depicts is
an empty one in which a person lives alone in Hong Kong. At the end, a Nepalese kid
says a few lines. The whole thing works.

Yau:

Why are there no subtitles at the beginning part of the film?

Chui:

I think it’s deliberate, so as to create…

Shi:

A sense of alienation.

Chui:

Do you know what is happening to the character? He is lonely and nobody can help
him.

Yau:

But without subtitles the audience can’t know…what he’s saying when he’s cryingout for help. Especially at the beginning, I found it difficult to enter into his innerworld. The story centres around him, and we need to see how Hong Kong rejects
people who are not Chinese or English speakers from his point of view. If we can see
things from his perspective, the story would have been more powerful. Now we arejust a spectator. Of course that creates a sense of alienation, but it originates with theaudience, not the character. These are two different things.

Cheung:That’s right, I can’t get into the story.

Yau:

It’s difficult to get into it. I had high hopes for this film because I thought it will
portray the living conditions of ethnic minorities or the problems they face, but in theend it fails to deliver.

Chang:In the first half of the film, we sense his helplessness quite clearly, but in the second
half, the film does not allow us to see the bigger problems he faces.

Fan:

Do you have anything to add? If not, we move on to Hong Kong will be destroyed
after 33 years.

Shi:

I quite like it. It’s an interesting work.

Yau:

Ha! You are not alone in thinking that.

Cheung:That is quite obvious. Everybody likes it.

Yau:

I want to know if the film had received any awards in Hong Kong?

9

Chui:

It had not.

Fan:

It’s only a web sensation.

Shi:

I think it’s cute.

Cheung:What it says is very close to the lives of Hong Kong people nowadays.

Yau:

Actually the work is a little old, probably a year to two years old…

Cheung:Really? Is there a time limit for entries?

Fan:Yes, the work has to be made within the last year, so this work was made within that
time.

Yau:

The work is still very current…

Fan:

That’s right, even though five months has passed since the ifva deadline, and the work
has to be made within a year from the deadline, so it could have been made a year anda half ago.

Yau:

It didn’t get any awards at Fresh Wave?

Chui:

It is not a Fresh Wave work.

Yau:

Oh, not a Fresh Wave work.

Cheung:But Fresh Wave films can be entered into ifva?

Chui:That’s right, but there is a different entry method for Fresh Wave films.

Fan:

Do you have anything to add?

Chui:

I think it is a nice-looking work. But if you talk about story, then I don’t have very
story feelings about it. I am cautious about films that go viral. Of course its
production is very interesting, but on the whole, it is very sloganizing: “We have tostay on and fight back!” For example, how do you deal with large corporations
leaving, and why would the Hong Kong government hide the truth? I think thediscussion is similar to what we said for Land Sickness. I know what it tries toexpress, which is that in Hong Kong will be destroyed after 33 years, we all have tofight back. This much is clear, but I can’t even find this much in Land Sickness. As
for the more detailed aspects, I don’t quite get it.

Yau:

The first time I saw it was the online version. Because everyone was talking about it, I
saw it for educational reasons, because all my students had seen it. I must admit when
I first saw it, I was shocked. At the time, many young people were feeling hopeless. I
saw a very youthful perspective in this work. In the beginning it tries to provide ananalysis of the various values that Hong Kong people hold, such as speculating inproperty and stocks. But when everyone who holds these values have left, the once10

desperate situation of Hong Kong changes, and there is hope for the city. I think thischange is interesting, because it goes beyond the initial political allegory. It starts out
as a political allegory, but as it develops it becomes something more. It becomes aseries of questions posed to the audience: “What do you value most about thissociety?”, “What don’t we like?” The ending is interesting and meaningful. It’s notabout hopelessness but rebirth.
Shi:That’s right, I like this film a lot. You in the teaching profession know how to express
yourselves, whereas I don’t. If one were to pick faults with it, I’m sure you can. Its
premise is Hong Kong will be destroyed after 33 years later. It starts out very welland the rhythm is good without being too overwhelming. I think this is a clever work,and not overly melodramatic. Of course it is very eager to please, and you (Chui)seems to be opposed to films like that.

Chui:

No, actually…

Shi:

If we delve into it, I’m sure we can unearth many issues with this film. I think that it
is very even in every respect. It has a good sense of humor, and is made with limited
resources. Of course I could point out many of its executional problems.

Cheung:That canon is quite good…but when it falls down…

Yau:

It’s basically convincing.

Shi:

That’s why I feel that it is very even in many respects…Basically it has manypleasing elements, but at the same time it is appropriate.

Yau:

I have to stress that many shorts are overly long. Most works don’t know what a shortfilm is supposed to be. This work justified its 7.5 minutes running time, without any
parts being extraneous.

Shi:

The length is adequate in expressing what it tries to say.

Yau:

Exactly. I think its handling of time is very well, and for a short film, this is hard to do.

Shi:

Yes.

Fan:

Do you have anything to add? If not, we move on to Connection.

Yau:

I have something to add. Even though we praised this film a lot, its acting could be
improved upon. The two works by this director have the same problem. Usually thelead character is acceptable, but the supporting characters’ acting is problematic andinadequate.

Shi:

The agent who walks by on the pedestrian footbridge is acceptable, but the rest are…

Chang:

It’s quite funny, like the part with the foreign tourists coming to Hong Kong. It looks
like a government public service announcement.

11

Yau:

I think the acting ability of many of the characters is problematic, but because it’s acomedy, it’s less of an issue.

Cheung:

The whole film is kind of surreal.

Shi:

So it’s ok if they overact a little.

Chang:A bit nonsensical.

Fan:

We can discuss Connection.

Shi:

I don’t quite understand this one.

Cheung:I only understood after reading the description.

Shi:

It starts out with coming to Reclamation Street from Kaiping. Of course I know thatthey are connected, but what is the point? In the end I…

Cheung:Actually it’s quite a good work. It talks about three generations of a family coming toHong Kong, and then going back, It comes full circle. It is a bit chaotic. She returned
because of her boyfriend, not of her own accord…

Shi:

I still don’t know what’s the point?

Chang:

This film is an assignment. It is a project done for the Hong Kong pavilion at the
Venice Architecture Biennale, and the theme of the exhibition s triangle, about therelationship between Hong Kong and Guangzhou.

Shi:

It’s an assignment.

Chang:

They made four films, which discusses…

Cheung:So both Connection and Rest Is Pending came from this project. They form a pair?

Chang:Yes.

Shi:

They are from the Institute of Architecture. Why are they involved in these films?

Yau:

They are commissioned works. Venice also provided sponsorship.

Cheung:I think so. It seems the Hong Kong government is also involved…there are four
works in total…

Shi:

That’s unfortunate. These two—this and Rest Is Pending—are among the worst films.

Chang:

It is conceptual.

Yau:

I agree with that…

12

Shi:

Even conceptual works could be done better…

Chang:

Its story only needs to show a certain connection. However…

Cheung:Actually its idea is good.

Chang:

It is quite good. The three generations of a family all working in Hong Kong…

Shi:

It shouldn’t be hard to tell a story about three generations. Nothing ground-breaking.

Yau:

That’s right.

Cheung:

Fortunately it is a documentary. The three characters are very realistic.

Yau:

Yes.

Cheung:

The granny’s hands…her facial expressions…

Yau:

The granny is very nice to watch, but the whole film is quite awful. I think it spent a
lot of effort on mise-en-scene, like composition.

Shi:

It’s too obsessed with prettiness. Both films are.

Yau:

Exactly. They are too concerned with superficial beauty, but the structure does notwork, and the story does not unfold properly. I think the biggest problem is that it isobvious from watching it on the big screen that the prettiness is for foreign
consumption, and you can feel it eroticizing the subject. You won’t understand why
Guangzhou is depicted this way, as if Lonely Planet was doing the filming. I must saythat it made me feel very uncomfortable watching it this time, whereas I didn’t havethis feeling when viewing it on DVD.

Shi:

I feel very irritated by it. After 10 minutes I still didn’t get the message, and didn’t
understand what it is trying to get across. All I see is three women talking incessantly.

Yau:

I feel sorry for the director, being criticized so harshly.

Fan:

I think they would like to know what you think. The next work is Guilty.

Cheung:This film feels like a documentary. Too bad that the lead actress is wearing suchheavy make-up.

Cheung:Even the policewoman has very curly eyelashes, and the girl is the same, even in class.

Shi:

Even the blind person is wearing eye make-up. In the lecture scene, you can see her
eyeliner. Secondary school students should not have eyeliners.

Cheung:They have eyeliners and false eye-lashes even in school. At first I found this person
who would go to protests quite interesting, but then I started to lose concentration. I
only noticed her false eyelashes.

13

Shi:

If she wore such make-up to work, it’ll be okay, but even when she goes to school…

Cheung:

The scenes when she goes to school reminds me once again that what I’m watching is
fake. Even the policeman looks like that…

Shi:

The policewoman is very pretty.

Chui:

I don’t have any special feelings…In the first round, I’d commented that the character
depiction is unclear. What kind of person is she? In the beginning she seems likesomeone who is part of the social activist circle, but because I know social activists…

Yau:

That’s right, I know them all.

Cheung:

You know them all?

Yau:

That’s right.

Cheung:So they are not really social activists?

Chui:

They all are. They are at the forefront of the movement at the moment.

Yau:

The people who discusses social issues with her, they are really involved in social
activism.

Chui:

So if she is so involved in the frontline, she should not have this kind of struggle. At
first I thought this is interesting if she was involved in this case because she wascaught up in the moment, and afterwards she starts to have worries. I’d be more
willing to accept this premise. Now I don’t understand her thoughts at the end.

Shi:

I find the biggest problem with this film is that it is all about the girl. But after
watching it for 18 minutes, I still don’t know what kind of person she is.

Yau:

When watching the credits in the film, I recognized many names I know. They aremostly university students. The film expresses the confusion that they feel. They are
involved with social activism, and when they are pushing and shoving, they don’tknow that they will be found guilty. How will they face their families? They discoverthat they have to deal with many issues about their future and families. There aremany young people like that in reality, and I think this work tries to express this kindof confusion. It is not that it fails to express it, but it could go deeper.

Fan:

Do you have anything to add? The lat work is 32 and 4.

Chui:This is my favorite film.

Cheung:Mine too.

Yau:

It’s really good. I really like it.

14

Cheung:

It really touched me.

Yau:

I liked it the first time I saw it. I really like it.

Chui:First of all, there are very few personal documentaries like this in Hong Kong. There
are more films like this in Taiwan, and in China, they even teach this type of method.
It begins searching within one’s own family, and discovers a great deal in the process.

Yau:

Taiwan has many films like this, but the end results are not that good.

Chui:Firstly, this kind of film is rare in Hong Kong, and the end result is very good.
Secondly, as it reveals more and more about the family relationships, I think it is evenmore exciting than many narrative films. Watching it again today, I realized that it
only relied on subtitles in place of voice-over. I was not aware of this in the firstround, but this did not prevent me from being involved in the story. We often say thatnowadays, it is easier to make a film, and this work provides the best illustration,
because it does change the rules. I have to declare that I know this director. I asked
her whether or not she is worried about such a personal film being…I know that many
people like this film. Before being entered into this competition, it was a Visible
Record documentary. I asked her if she wanted this film to receive a lot of public
screenings. She didn’t answer.

Shi:

I don’t really understand what you mean.

Chui:This work is very personal, and I wanted to know if she is prepared to…

Yau:Open up to the whole world.

Chui:

I’m not sure what she said at the end. But I did ask if her family members had seen
the film. I think it’d be interesting to let them see it.

Cheung:

She mustn’t let her family members see this. I think the film has a very good form,
and that it is divided into four parts. The mixture of form and content is very good.
The subtitles are very well written and very sincere.

Shi:

You can tell the director is an artistic person by her photos, timing and the things she
writes.

Chui:

She likes to draw.

Shi:

The timing with which she displays the photos is very good.

Cheung:She is good at capturing people’s eyes.

Shi:

Perhaps I am being old-fashioned, but how can you face your family after making afilm like that?

Cheung:I don’t think she cares anymore.

15

Chui:

Thirty years ago, Sex, Lies, and Videotape explored the same issues. Now it has
finally become commonplace. This is something we all have to face. She is a City
University student, so she has chosen to enter this field…

Shi:

What does she study?

Fan:

School of Creative Media.

Cheung:Is she your student?

Yau:

No.

Shi:

She is from Kaifung. If her mother saw these photos, she would definitely have a fit.

Cheung:

She mustn’t let her mother know. You can’t see the uncle clearly.

Shi:

But the words of the uncle are ambiguous. Her mother’s photos are a problem. Thosefrom Kaifung are conservative.

Cheung:

She also filmed her mother having a mental breakdown.

Chui:

I like her artistic treatment of the subject. She is not pretentious, but expresses herself
in a sincere way.

Cheung:That’s right.

Shi:

Yes, she’s not pretentious. This girl is very artistic.

Yau:

In the first round, this was one of my favorite works. I agree that Ying Liang helped
her a lot. It has a very Japanese feel about it, and the sentiments are close to Kazuo
Hara’s films, which stems from the personal documentary tradition. I am pleased thatHong Kong has finally produced such a personal documentary. Nowadays, there are
more and more documentaries by young people about their own families. In Taiwan,
the trend has reached epidemic proportions. This kind of thing can easily get carried
away, for example by being too sentimental, or having an overly tidy ending, or
becoming too emotional and hysterical in the process. This work deals with a very
challenging subject matter, but keeps things under control. This process of negotiationis very difficult, and the director handles it very well. She deftly uses different levelsof media production such as taking photos and videos, and then showing herself
editing. At her age, such self reflexivity is rare, and as a result the emotional power
and maturity of the work is very touching. As for whether she will damage relations
with her parents, I am not that worried. She has enough maturity and courage tointerrogate her own mother, and the scene in which she confronts her mother is
especially brave. Being able to discuss these issues is much better than keeping things
under wraps. She uses media as a tool for exposing herself, thus influencing her
relationship with her parents and changing the family dynamics, which is aninteresting thing.

16

Shi:

This is all a bit theoretical. Chinese people think that you should not air your dirty
laundry in public, and Kaifung people are especially conservative.

Fan:

Alright. Are you ready to nominate works for the Gold Award? We will distributepieces of paper, on which you can write down your choices. We are voting by secretballot.

Cheung:We are voting so soon? Perhaps we can make nominations first.

Fan:Sure, you can do that.

Shi:

Are there works that you wish to exclude? Perhaps we can decide that way.

Fan:

Or you can make your nominations or eliminate some works.

Chui:

According to the previous discussion, you seem to be more keen about 32 and 4, The
Woman Security Guards and Hong Kong will be destroyed after 33 years.

Yau:

That’s right, I think we are more or less in agreement.

Shi:

Then we don’t have to waste time considering the rest.

Yau:

Let’s rank these three works then.

Shi:

Alright.

Cheung:

I agree.

Chui:

Although…I guess we could vote this way.

Cheung:If you don’t like Hong Kong will be destroyed after 33 years, you can nominate
another film.

Chui:

32 and 4 is okay.

Shi:

Let me begin. Even though I am fond of Hong Kong will be destroyed after 33 years,
I feel that it deserves Special Mention. It is very likeable, and the idea is very good, it
is not solid enough. I would pick 32 and 4 as the Gold Award, and The Woman
Security Guards as the Silver Award winners.

Chui:

Me too. We can leave now.

Yau:

Me too.

Cheung:I’m the same.

(They all laugh)
Cheung:Then there’s no need for secret ballot.

17

Shi:

This year’s ifva manages to find a group of very simpatico jury members.

Fan:

Chang, are you okay with it?

Chang:

I also feel that Hong Kong will be destroyed after Hong Kong will be destroyed after
33 years should be Special Mention, because the work is not very outstanding.

Chui:

32 and 4 is undisputedly deserving of the Gold Award.

Yau:

Honestly speaking, I’m proud of having 32 and 4 represent Hong Kong in overseas
film festivals.

Cheung:

She truly feels for the film medium, which is a rare thing for her young age.

Shi:

She uses many special techniques in a precise way, and well deserves a Gold Award.
Has she graduated yet?

Chui:

She graduated this year.

Open Category
Gold Award
32 and 4
Chan Hau-chun
Silver Award
The Woman Security Guards
Chan Ho-lun Fredie, Ma Chi-hangSpecial Mention
Hong Kong will be destroyed after 33 years
Ng Siu-lun

18