Shirkers (2018)

Sandi TanJasmine Kin Kia NgPhilip CheahSophia Siddique Harvey
Sandi Tan


Shirkers (2018) is a English movie. Sandi Tan has directed this movie. Sandi Tan,Jasmine Kin Kia Ng,Philip Cheah,Sophia Siddique Harvey are the starring of this movie. It was released in 2018. Shirkers (2018) is considered one of the best Documentary movie in India and around the world.

In 1992, teenager Sandi Tan and her friends Sophie and Jasmine shot Singapore's first indie-a road movie called "Shirkers"-with their enigmatic American mentor, Georges Cardona. Sandi wrote the script and played the lead, a killer named S. After shooting wrapped, Georges vanished with all the footage! 20 years later, the 16mm cans are recovered in New Orleans, sending Sandi-now a novelist in Los Angeles-on a new personal odyssey across two continents and many media: 16mm, digital, Hi8, Super8, slides, animation and handwritten letters. A kaleidoscopic punk rock ghost story!

Shirkers (2018) Reviews

  • Epitome of the self-indulgent 'filmmaker'


    I love documentaries. I love indie films. I was at one time a wannabe filmmaker just like the director of this film. So I was confounded that this film would have such a high rating. For the most part I felt the core of the film is almost a tale of the mundane (like someone telling you the one time their bike was stolen and how it was like totally a horrible experience). Because it recounts the trials and tribulations of a amateur production (which weren't that wild really), and are similar to stories that pretty much every film maker has. If Shirkers had actually been a film and had come out and been groundbreaking, then there would be a point to all this. A documentary like Lost in La Mancha is a good example of a documentary about a film gone wrong. This, however, is just another wannabe filmmaker saying they made this one amazing film, but it got ruined because of (fill in the blank). The one interesting part of the tale was George's story. It was what this film truly should have been about. Unfortunately, his story comes in to focus about an hour into the film and never gets thoroughly resolved or explored. Because this film is after all about the director, about her lost work, about the feelings it elicited from here -- in other words, all about her. There really is nothing else that the film explores. That ego-centricity is clear through the often clunky narration and through some of the interviews. As some friends even state, everything is about Tan. And that is what this film is, a film about a film written by her, starring her. So why should others be interested in it?

  • Wade through the first half. The second half is compelling.


    I thought the first half of the movie, which is the making of the original Shirkers film in 1992, was a little too slow. But once we get to the thrust of the movie, i.e., what Georges Cardona did to Sandi Tan and her colleagues, it was very, very compelling. Maybe we had to sit through the long set-up so the movie could effectively show how devastating it was to Sandi Tan that Georges Cardona crushed her dream. I thought the insights made by Stephen Tyler (no, not the guy from Aerosmith), who this also happened to gave additional context and corroboration regarding the sick mind of Cardona. Tan and her colleagues all became successful in their lives anyway, but they didn't deserve this happening to them after they put so much work into the original film. So if you haven't watched this yet and want to, my advice is to hang in there and give this documentary a chance.

  • Self-important slow burning dud


    I heard the Sandi Tan interview on Fresh Air and was intrigued by Shirkers. Went into it with high expectations and thinking I knew what to expect, but was let down as I watched it unfold. Tan narrates a film that is about her which includes video made by teenagers decades ago, a lot of people talking about Tan, and uninteresting storytelling. It's a documentary with the seriousness and importance of a historic figure but the subject is a film critic/film maker describing this one mildly interesting thing that happened to her. The premise was interesting, but it fell apart under the weight of her own self-importance.

  • An uninteresting women makes an uninteresting movie which fortunately disappears.


    An uninteresting person makes an uninteresting movie. Fortunately, the film disappears due to the bad evil director. This allows her to fantasize that it was really a great film and then to make an uninteresting documentary about it. Extremely boring film with nothing of interest. Less than a waste of time, a dull grind made to allow the failed filmaker to indulge herself at the audiences expense.

  • The definition of pretentious.


    I haven't written a review in a long time, but this movie sucked so bad I was absolutely shocked at how many good ratings it recieved. In the spirit of this "film," I present my review (a collage-like series of takes" and whining about my own issues that I texted a friend after watching it): -direct quote from filmmaker of "shi-ers" "there is nothing there" ironic!!!! hilarious! -this doc suuuuuuuuuucks so bad -fell asleep twice last night -trying to finish now, hoping i was tired...noooope blows -the wife says: complete garbage. she'd rather watch football!!!!! -evidence of why this sucks so bad: "Jasmine" was introduced to the audience in the first few minutes...yet 85 min in, this???? -This crap is the definition of "Pretentious" -I've decided, man...You HAVE to see this! Have to! It'll compete with Predator, Mortal Engines and London Fields for WORST of the year." -Fiiiiiiiiinally, it's over. Fillmakers friend just told her, in so many words: GET over yourself!!! -I've decided: Shirkers is a must see!

Hot Search