Report of the Event

3 08 2012

A report on the event: Movie Screening followed by interaction with Rajan Kathet, Kshitiz Chhetri and Shail Shrestha.

Name of the Event : Movie Screening Followed by Interaction.

Date : Jule 13, 2012

Location : Media Lab , Department of Language and Mass Communication, Kathmandu University Premises.

Name of the Movie : Parichaya, Directed by Viplav R. Pokhrel

Guests : Rajan Kathet,Kshitiz Chhetri and Shail Shrestha

Mentor : Mr. Hem Raj Kafle

Host : Bibhu Poudel

Number of Participants : 27

Duration : 1 hour 45 minutes.

As per the requirement of the course Group Activity, Saaurya group had organized an event which was initially titled Movie screening followed by interaction with Rajan Kathet . However, we were very fortunate that Kshitiz Shrestha and Shail Shrestha also accompanied Rajan Kathet and participated in the event as guest speaker. The mentor of the course, Mr. Hem Raj Kafle’s presence in the event was very inspiring and fruitful as previously expected.
Background of the Event

The event was organized on June 13, 2012 .It started at around 2 pm and ended at nearly 3:45 pm. The nearly two hour long event was hosted by Bibhu Poudel, a member of Saaurya group in the Media Lab of Department of Language and Mass Communication, Kathmandu University Dhulikhel.
As the title suggests, the event was divided into two parts.

1) Screening of the movie: The documentary, Parichaya was screened in the event. The 28 minute long documentary is directed by Viplav R. Pokhrel and Bibhu Poudel is the co-writer of the documentary. It is a documentary about street children living in the streets of Kathmandu.

2) Interaction: An interaction program followed the screening of the movie. In the interaction program the participants interacted about the documentary and an unexpected yet interesting discussion related to Bachelor’s of Media Studies at Kathmandu University took place.

Introduction to the Guests

In the proposal submitted to organize the event, it has been mentioned that Rajan Kathet would be the only guest speaker in the program. However, as suggested by Hem Raj Sir, Kshitiz Chhetri was also invited .Fortunately Shail Shrestha also accompanied them in the event which was a surprise. It was even more surprising that all these speakers bicycled from Kathmandu to Dhulikhel just to attend the event. In addition, Mr. Hem Raj Kafle, the mentor of the course was also the speaker in the program along with other participants. The participants were the students of Bachelor’s of Media Studies, I year, II Semester. The total number of people present in the event was 27.

So, below is the brief description to all the guest speakers of the program.

Rajan Kathet: Rajan Kathet has been actively involved in film making. He has been making short films and has recently established a film production company ‘Chhapro ma’ in collaboration with his friends. He is an alumnus of Kathmandu University. He is also an activist of Bicycle Kathmandu 2020 project.

Kshitiz Shrestha has been actively involved in film making. He has been making short films and has recently established a film production company ‘Chhapro ma’ in collaboration with his friends. However He focuses on documentary film making .He is an alumnus of Kathmandu University. He is also an activist of Bicycle Kathmandu 2020 project.

Shail Shrestha has been actively involved in film making. He has been making short films and has recently established a film production company ‘Chhapro ma’ in collaboration with his friends. He is an alumnus of Kathmandu University. He is also an activist of Bicycle Kathmandu 2020 project.
From the description above it can be known that all the guest speakers are the alumni of Kathmandu University and the graduate student of Bachelors of Media Studies. Currently, they have been collaborating with each other to make short fictional and documentary films through a common platform, Chhapro ma Production. So the reasons for inviting them as guest speaker are as follows:

1) They are the alumni of Kathmandu University and the graduates of Bachelor’s of Media Studies.
2) They are film literate and are acquainted with the process of film making. Participants were expected to learn from them.
3) They could share their experiences about film making, which is also a form of Media.
4) Kshitiz Chhetri has been focusing on documentary film making and his knowledge and judgment about the screened movie would be crucial.

Event Chronology

We are happy to say that the program went smoothly and according to the tentative time schedule. It was started at 2 pm and ended nearly at 3:45 pm.

In the first half of the program the movie “Parichaya” was screened. As mentioned before the screening was 28 minutes long.

After the screening, all the guest speakers and the participants were asked, what your view about the documentary is. There were few responses from the participants. Sarun Manandhar , Sushank Kumar Yadav and Ngima Gelu Lama expressed their views . However all the guest speaker and Mr. Hem Raj Kafle expressed their views about the documentary. There were both negative and positive comments about the movie. Overall, the movie got positive response from the viewers.

After the discussion about the movie, a surprise yet interesting and important discussion took place about the course content of Bachelors of Media Studies. Many questions were asked and Mr. Hem Raj Kafle and the guest speakers gave answers and clarifications quenching the queries of the participants.
So let us see what all the guest speakers and participants said about the movie.

Rajan Kathet: The documentary is good and engaging. I didn’t get bore throughout the movie. There are some technical errors , the sound and picture are not so clear and there are some problems in editing but in a movie , whether a documentary or fictional, subject matter are primary and technicality are secondary.

Kshitiz Shrestha: In the beginning of a documentary a question is asked. At the end of the documentary, the audience should get the answer. In the beginning audience has a view about the subject matter in the documentary and by the end of the documentary, the view should be changed. I didn’t get that in this movie. The subject matter of the movie should be expressed clearly through sound or visual or subtitles. In this movie there were some moments where both the subtitles and audio are unclear.

The lady in the movie talked about policemen and their attitude about the women living in the street. I think the documentary would have been better had there been an interview of a policemen. It would have made the documentary more balanced. However, I have watched this documentary for the second time and I found it indulging and looking at the level of the makers, it is a job well done.

Shail Shrestha: If a filmmaker is to indulge the audience throughout his movie then the characters in his/her movie should be interesting. Generally in documentaries there are many characters and few of them are interesting .But in this documentary, most of the characters are interesting and they have spoken frankly despite they live in street.

Hem Raj Kafle: When I was told about the movie, my initial though about it was that it should be like the documentaries shown in Nepal Television. It must have been made to impress people having dollars .But as I have seen it, my impression about the movie has changed.
The characters in the movie belong to the street. They are street children .People looks down on them. Despite this, they have spoken with some control over their views. They are shy and they have cared about their prestige. So, from this we can conclude that even these people are aware about their status and respect. Many comments have been made about the quality of sound. It might have been editor’s incompetence to make it clear. But if we see at the subject and the surrounding, the sound blends perfectly. It adds to the ambience of the city and street where the children live.

Sushank Kumar Yadav: The sound of the movie is not clear. I had to refer to the subtitles to understand what the people in the movie were talking.

Sarun Manandhar: I loved the movie. I have seen it before. Although the subject matter is not unique, the way it has been presented is unique.

So to conclude, most of the speakers presented both negative and positive comments about the documentary. The negative comments were mainly targeted to the technical glitches like editing, picture and sound quality. On the other side the positive comments were targeted towards the presentation, interesting characters- their frankness, and the subject matter.

Following the discussion, Ngima Gelu Lama expressed his desire of studying Film making under Media
studies as a credit course like other courses. Similarly Mr. Hem Raj Kafle and other guest speakers shared their experiences as teacher and students respectively of Media Studies in Kathmandu University. Many misunderstandings were cleared out too.

So the discussion program and the event concluded on a positive node. The program was successful as expected before.

Evaluation of the event from the organizers:

Ashim Khanal, Bibhu Poudel, Prativa Shrestha, Sujata Bhattarai and Subash Khatiwada are the
members of Saaurya Group which organized this event. All the members had worked equally hard to make this event successful. Similarly this event would not have taken place so successfully without the help of Mr.Hem Raj Kafle, Sarun Manandhar, Ngima Gelu Lama and Abhinaya Ghimire. And ofcourse, the presence of the guest speakers made the program alive.

Here are some positive aspects of the program.
1) It was held according to the tentative schedule and was held in time.
2) The audience and the speaker’s participation were substantial.
3) Most the participants enjoyed the movie.
4) The discussion program has cleared out some of the misunderstanding that existed between the
department and the students.
5) The objective of giving some knowledge about film-making to the participants was achieved successfully.

Here are some drawbacks of the program.
1) The host could have made the program more interesting.
2) The audiences’ participation on the discussion program was not enough as expected.
3) The time period was not enough for the discussion.
4) The sitting arrangement and sound system could have been better.

So, if we judge the event in a full frame then it can be taken as a successful program. All the objectives mention in the proposal were fulfilled. The organizers got the first hand experience of organizing an event and the guests were able to share their knowledge and experience about film making.

Total pages on Microsoft Word – 5 , 1668 words.

Advertisements

Actions

Information

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: