Emjayreviews90

We are all taught the proverb, all that “Glitters is not Gold” or “Do not judge a book by its cover”, but after watching 2.0, I genuinely feel that we can go through every piece or written media we have and replace it with 2.0 and the meaning would remain the same. Watching 2.0 is like discovering a treasure box. One that is ornate, beautiful, grand designed with perfect geometry, shaped and sculpted by a thousand hands which opens up with a tantalizing hiss to reveal a small dried up piece of paper saying “treasure” crumpled up in some random corner. Let me get this out of the way, the first three minutes of the film where we see a man walking through the fields climb up the cell tower, surrounded by birds and hanging himself is a master class in 3D film-making where the director and the cinematographer show us how 3D can be used as a deeper tool than as a flashy gimmick and an afterthought. This along with some brilliant uses of lighting and framing show that there is ...

It is always special watching someone make something purely out of passion despite having no practical experience, and in a word that is how I would describe “The Light”; special. Despite all its flaws, every frame screams Passion, and in an ideal world that would probably be enough to make “The Light” one of my favourite short films. The film attempts to capture the feeling of depression, and from some of the shots and ideas it is obvious that the director is telling a very personal story. That is why it breaks my heart to say that the film did not live up to my expectations. Let me set the context for you, I saw the trailer first set to a fantastic cover of Hurt by Johnny Cash. The first thing I noticed in the trailer was the editing and I was captivated. When I did see the film, the thing that let me down most was the editing. I felt that the trailer told me a more consistent story compared to the film. What made it that much more disappointing was that the tr...

While watching Neithal, my perception of what makes a play “Good” came into question. How do you define a good play? Is it a good play if it follows certain arbitrary rules set by critics? Is it a good play if all the actors do an amazing job? Is considered a good play if the audience have a great time? The very scale by which I classify plays as good or bad is based on personal preferences and opinions and the very fact that Neithal is a play made by a very close friend calls into question the integrity of any review or critique I might express. Despite that however, I feel that Neithal has a very paradoxical sense to it that I really want to explore from two different perspectives. “The Intended Audience” and “The critic” Neithal had a unique advantage right from its conceptualization and that the director, Praveen, knew the general make-up of the audience who will be viewing the play; College students between the ages of 19 and 25 and, I am sure even he knows this, he has c...