It's difficult to fault the production values of this film, which takes place in high-detail Victoria Park and a fully-equipped radio mixing booth. In it, a Murray Deeker rip-off rants on air about Sidney Man's failing performance... in a sport that is infuriatingly never revealed. He takes several callers on the issue, most of whom are closely connected to Sidney and take abuse from the host. Essentially, I don't find watching this kind of thing entertaining at all, and as it becomes more clear that the film's central mystery (what sport is this?) won't be answered, the repetition becomes suddenly boring. The writing takes a brash risk: can we appreciate a character who is being mostly berated in the course of the movie? I didn't get enough reason to like him, even in the end, so the film's ultimate twist doesn't resonate with any emotion for me. Too bad - I scored them "5" on technical production though the skill and gear the team have used just didn't, in the end, make a lovable film on the day.
A radio announcer diss-ing a sports player.
This short really didnt do anything for me. I thought it was quite funny, that most of the people who rang up were people that knew the sports person. His mummy, his son, and his coach (i think there was one more person, but i cant remember). The director really love his close ups. AND I thought the young boy who acted in this was amazing.
Broken is an amazing movie with a level of detail you seldom see in short films, let alone short films completed in 48 hours. Citizens of Cinema have definitely brought a cohesive story to the screen in the short time they were allotted.
The portrayal of the bitter radio commentator is brilliant and the attitude of the sports player ignoring everything being said really strengthened everything in the movie and reflected on the character of the sports player who also ignores everything said about him. I was half expecting him to start spitting on me through the screen in the heat of his argument. The actor cast as the son did an amazing job, and was completely believable in his role.
The story flowed well, and both the characters and scenario were well fleshed out and convincing. For the amount of dialog in this film, I was pleasantly surprised to be attentive all the way through. I am however somewhat concerned that this was not received by many people in the audience, and that the omission of the sport Sidney played caused a distraction from the story.
The inclusion of the elements was also masterfully achieved. The broken toy is pivotal to the plot, and a clever play is made on the character name given. The elements flowed together really nicely without being too obvious or being overlooked, and the cuts were bang on.
Despite my contempt for films about sports and films with lots of talking in them, of which this was both, I found myself really enjoying it. I could probably write pages and pages picking out the nuances in this film, but suffice it to say, I was blown away. This was engaging and really moved me to empathize with the characters in it.
An interesting twist to the genre ‘Sports Movie’ in that no actual sport was named, but then I don’t think that was the point.
The film demonstrated the pressures that many athletes are placed under in today’s professional sports environment and the dodgy behaviour and barren relationships created with their families that happen as a result of that.
A very different type of movie compared to all the others in heat 3 with few laughs but poignant none the less with the reveal of the boy’s thoughts and feelings to his father through a radio DJ/ talkback show.
I liked the film and thought the production values were slick - considerably higher than anyone else’s on the night. Not perfect but you could certainly tell there were people involved with some significant post production skills!
It was a bit lengthy with the internals of a talkback radio station a constant theme but the storyline was very effective and overall a worthy first year attempt. I would be surprised to not see it at least on the short list.
I not sure about this review database. It seems to me to be a vehicle for V48hour-short-film-bashing. As one of the film-makers of broken I find myself wanting to defend this film and I'm sure other film-makers must feel the same way about their creations. These are short films made from scratch in 2 days. Anyone who achieved this I think has made a successful film. It's not going to be perfect and I think to judge these films on their little idiosyncrasies is totally non-productive for the event or the film-makers. It's just mean.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion but I find myself wondering what the purpose of such a forum is. Is it for competing teams to anonymously bag one another? Are these reviews seriously considered to get bums on seats? Are they meant to make the film-maker feel bad or good about their achievement? Is it just for fun and some lighthearted banter? I don't know.
Personally as a film-maker, I'm interested in making films - not destroying them.
Maybe if the critics weren't anonymous or there was some way to critique the critic it may make this forum more balanced.
To all the film-makers out there I salute YOU. 5 stars from me.
Nicely shot, poorly directed close-up-athon. The audio hurt everyone in the cinema; turn the levels down!
Ok, but not again.
Sorry, I put this review on the wrong film, so here it is again:
'Broken' was beautiful as far as its production values went, but they really let themselves down with the script. I found it set itself up to be something amazing, but delivered no spark or surprises. I found it extremely boring in the middle, and "Sidney Man's Son" was hardly a big twist at the end - the audience knew it the whole time. Moral of the story: big production values don't make up for poor scripts. Work harder next year guys!
I was ok, the sound was a bit loud, the boy was great i thought and even thought the radio announcer was talking so loud i actually commend his work, good acting i reakon but shame the other elements let it down, no hard feelings good luck.