(2002)

User Reviews

Review this title
2 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Touching and beautiful
Madam_Pomfrey1 October 2003
This was such a treasure of a film for me. My mum and I watched it on the train and we both absolutely loved it.

It's a very touching film about old friends. The film isn't specific on what the background history of the two characters are but drops enough clues to get you from start to end.

The acting was so good that not once did I ever doubt that Edgar and Agnus were just actors. As rare as it may be, I really felt this film in my heart. As if the filmmakers were calling out or dedicated the film.

And I guess its because of that, that I enjoyed it so.

Brilliant short story filmmaking.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A 12 minute short that feels like a 3 hour Lutheran church meeting
RT Firefly22 June 2005
Have you ever heard someone tell a joke which goes on way too long, so long that you realize it has gone far beyond what any possible punch line could ever recover it from, which, of course, proves true as the punch line is a pun along the lines of; "I left my harp in Stan Frans disco". Well, Meeting Agnus is like that joke, but without a punch line. Apparently director Alexander Pappas misunderstood the meaning of the word "short" in the phrase "short film". This is a tortuously long short that conveys a simple idea that could be told in about 12 seconds. Pappas does it in 60 times that.

It would help if the film explained who was who and why they were doing it, but then you would have nothing to guess about and you would know immediately that it stinks. Perhaps I am too harsh on it, as it was fairly well made and acted. I don't want to be hard on Pappas, he does an excellent job in all other regards. In fact, it probably could have been a good short if it had something called... what's the word... notboringashell? But don't take my word for it, google the title and see for yourself.

When watching bad shorts my nagging question is always "why?" Why was all this effort and money used to make something so mundane, so pointless? It's not like making a crappy feature, that you can trick people into buying; you can't sell a short. It is made primarily for the director. And another thing, I don't know what it is about amateur filmmakers that make them think that people would be interested in everything little thing they do, rather than what they say, but their films are almost always too long with no point. It's like a musician that thinks that watching him set up his equipment is as enjoyable as the song he plays, both of which he does poorly. In that regard, this short plays like a 12 minute version of "Shave and a Haircut".
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed