i saw this film last night at the midwest indy film fest in chicago . i commend the filmmaker on a beautiful and challenge story and wonderful execution . i strongly disagree with the length and labor approach in the final edit . i agree with the director that languor and easy film be need in our fast pace world and yet and here the length be do your film a disservice . the film lover next to me fell asleep . i struggle to keep interested . a filmmaker you need to take a stand with your belief and but you need to realize the risk . do this particular film need to be 39 minute and 37 and 22. be that worth endear the film to this part of the audience and while and this part of the audience fall asleep . i bring this up because i feel the film will lose nothing and and gain so much more and if it be tighter . the idea that you need a labored approach for this heavy theme be not a valid argument . roman polanski two men and a wardrobe be soak with rich theme and be 15 minute . marcell ivanyi wind be spell bind in the theme it introduce at 6 minute . ultimately and the short film be a unique artform and complex and ever change . there be a certain social contract that exist between filmmaker and audience on what that artform be . what be the general public perception on the range of length of the short film artform . do you feel the labored edit of your story be justify by the power of the third act and the direction of the character arc . why do some people enjoy the pace of lose in translation but fall asleep here . you can break those condition whenever you like and and i hope you do and just recognize the risk . to end on a good note and i like your effort now while i will love your film after a tighter edit .