Feedback from Max Bruinsma, Marco de Mutiis and Eduardo Simantob was interesting because it was (very diverse) feedback we have not yet got to hear. It ranged from “this is unacceptable” (MdM) to “I have seen like 500 pieces about this topic and this ranks among the better ones” (MB).
After I explained the challenges and decisions we faced, Marco said: «Considering the time you had, the access you got is incredible. I am happy you shared the process because that saved it. The movie is very oversimplified.
It is too stereotypical, most of all because of the music. The boys voice made him furious, it was so manipulative and emotionally montaged. Max also said that music often supports footage which isn’t emotional, in this case it would not have been needed though. Because the family was always in the room and left it for the first time in the end (when music comes in), the shot sequence would have been emotional enough on its own. (ES) However, there is a balance in the movie because we did not show the father as a victim.
The biggest «problems» of all: The movie is manipulative (this is not necessarily a bad thing) (MdM). Also we did not take a clear position, and «the hotter the topic, the stronger should be your position.» (ES). If we would have had more time, we should have been more provocative.
In comparison to the other two MovingImages movies, the question of putting ourselves in it is more complex here. It would have created a new interesting layer and shown a different approach to the subject of refugees. With showing their hospitality towards us, the refugees would have been shown less as impassive ‘victims’ but rather as a kind family which gives us something back. Scenes of our communication with Google Translator would have helped for integration (f.e. the viewer would get a hint of how to communicate with refugees) and therefore reduce fears and support approaching each other.