Self-Review

I am trying to figure out the reason why everytime of the review, i was asked the foundamental questions about the logics and meanings of the film.

I agree with some of the ideas raised in the recent review:
i should make a better introduction of the boy's blindness. if i introduced a confusion at the beginning, i should answer it by the end.
less emphasis on his partial deaf. if he is not deaf, the film can also work. this will also give me more freedom to use the sound to assist the images.
different scenes are falling apart at the moment. i should link them together, rather than leaving them side by side.

Also there are some thoughts i would like to keep:
i should communicate with the audience more. but i am not connecting the film with the main stream audience, because the film is not for them. It is meant to be artistic and experimental. So i should only use hints (obviously i need to add more) to establish my story. i am not making another film with 3-stage structures and clear development of plots. i want it to be different in aspects of visions and filmic language. this is also the reason i choose to do it in 2d.

Instead of making everything clear from the right beginning, i perfer to raise the viewers' interests to find out more by themselves. i also want every second of the film is interesting to watch on its own.

Here is a list of things to discuss at tomorrow's meeting:
beginning sequence -- home and city
chicken looks
bg -- 2d, in camera angles, morphing between scenes to connect them better
any extra ending to tell the fact
more mum shots in the film. where?
Timetable -- no test, no experiments, everyone needs to negociate with me before do anything.

To Do:
draw a rough storyboard for the beginning sequence
think how to connect scenes better.