'Lipstick' is a film about an ageing man who finds an old photo of his (ex) wife taken when she was younger. He gets a bit depressed over this and, for some weird reason, decides to buy clothes like what she was wearing in the photograph and dress up like her.
I have no idea how they got Jack Shepherd (TV's detective Wycliffe) to appear in what seems to be a student short film. Perhaps it was a favour for a friend (I can't imagine he got paid much, if at all), who knows. Either way, watching this film just gave me the impression he was a desperate actor in need of a career.
This is the kind of film that student filmmakers make. No offence to any of you guys, but what I mean is it looks like it has NO budget which means bad, cheap props and locations that are evidently just 'someone's house' or 'someone's bedroom' with little or no set decoration, amateurish lighting, little or no music and really, really bad directing. We are ultimately subjected to one static shot after another of this guy just moping around. The writer/director is desperately in need of lessons in how to tell a story and how to tell it cinematically.
The storyline really is quite silly and the film just isn't made very well at all (adding to my image of Shepherd as a desperate actor). For example, we are shown an image of his wife in a flashback wearing a particular type of dress and shoes. He then goes to a shoe shop to buy these same shoes. Only, the shop assistant shows him some shoes that look nothing like the ones his wife was wearing but he says "yes, these are just like them, remarkably so". I'm like "what???" Then he orders a dress which again barely resembles the dress in the photo/flashback. He puts it on, puts on some make up, looks really stupid, stares in to space and then the film is over and with it goes the career of the director (who thankfully doesn't appear to have directed since).
I have no idea how they got Jack Shepherd (TV's detective Wycliffe) to appear in what seems to be a student short film. Perhaps it was a favour for a friend (I can't imagine he got paid much, if at all), who knows. Either way, watching this film just gave me the impression he was a desperate actor in need of a career.
This is the kind of film that student filmmakers make. No offence to any of you guys, but what I mean is it looks like it has NO budget which means bad, cheap props and locations that are evidently just 'someone's house' or 'someone's bedroom' with little or no set decoration, amateurish lighting, little or no music and really, really bad directing. We are ultimately subjected to one static shot after another of this guy just moping around. The writer/director is desperately in need of lessons in how to tell a story and how to tell it cinematically.
The storyline really is quite silly and the film just isn't made very well at all (adding to my image of Shepherd as a desperate actor). For example, we are shown an image of his wife in a flashback wearing a particular type of dress and shoes. He then goes to a shoe shop to buy these same shoes. Only, the shop assistant shows him some shoes that look nothing like the ones his wife was wearing but he says "yes, these are just like them, remarkably so". I'm like "what???" Then he orders a dress which again barely resembles the dress in the photo/flashback. He puts it on, puts on some make up, looks really stupid, stares in to space and then the film is over and with it goes the career of the director (who thankfully doesn't appear to have directed since).