I, like my classmates, was not very impressed with the film. The actors of all were the least compelling part of the film. The dialogue (was there even any? I cant quite remember) was almost completely void of identifiable emotion, and it made it very hard to decipher how each character felt in response to the situation; they all seemed rather uncaring.

This made the small amount of dialogue there was unimpressive. The film seemed to try and rely on visual storytelling more than anything with the flyers and a dead bird, but even then it was such basic imagery that it was tough trying to work out exactly what conflict occurred and who by, because suddenly there was a dead bird involved.

The framing of particular shots though was rather well done. In particular one of the final shots that we see  gave a nice sense of depth where the camera was positioned in a stone hallway looking out over the balcony. This was one of the elements that portrayed the drama of the situation better.

I think if the actors would have better refined their performance, it would have been easier to gather what the story was. From what I worked out the first few characters we see were participating in a kind of bird club, and some sort of bully tried to make one of the other characters look bad by throwing a dead bird over a balcony.

I think if character motivations were better established the story would have made more sense. For example if the dead bird was meant to be some kind of insult to the bird club, the conflict made have made more sense. As it was it seemed like the girls found a dead bird and accidentally dropped it over a balcony, which was not particularly compelling.