ONLINE CHATTER >>>
Today's comment comes from local filmmaker Kris Crews, in response to a string of commentary which he kicked off responding to a 2010 review by Volcano film writer Christopher Wood.
Crews writes,
Chris, I didn't realize that you are a regular film critic for the volcano. I'm sure you've had plenty of experience developing your skill. Otherwise, you wouldn't be doing it.
I apologize for suggesting that you no longer do your job. I simply request that you take it seriously. I will critique any critic on the basis of objective rationale.
I'm not concerned with your personal opinion. Let's just say the film was too slow for you. I do think that the film was misrepresented by the statement, "really, the whole 18 minutes of the film is just a montage of the 2 of them playing at different parks in Tacoma".
Steph, It is not about a negative opinion. Anyone can have an opinion, like that the plot was too slow for their taste, but the summing up of the film, "really, the whole 18 minutes of the film is just a montage of the 2 of them playing at different parks in Tacoma" is a gross oversimplification of the story.
I do not believe that is an opinion. The film either is or isn't a montage of allan and madeline playing in parks for 18 minutes. That says nothing of the scenes of regular daily activity backed by engaging improvasational dialogue delivered by a 3 year old.
I get that the film is not stellar (it was made in 72 hours), but it holds up in terms of communicating a solid message; one that speaks of the bitter/sweet reality of the human condition. There is dialogue & and it was captured and delivered cleanly. There is movement. It may seem mundane that the action that occurs follows the father and daughter as the wake, help a neighbor deliver drums to church, ride a bus, bathe, & play in a park. The story is about the dad's reconciliation of the misunderstanding that what he thought was his destiny was lost and he has to continue on in the absence of his partner and child's mother. That is enough.