Now I'm someone who deeply believes in the possibility of spontaneous human combustion. I have been ridiculed for at least two decades for this belief but I'm still standing firm. I subscribe to the theory that cigarette embers may have fallen on a sleeping person, slowly ignited the layer of fat underneath their skin, brought their body to a critical temperature level and BOOM!

Because of these beliefs, this film resonates with me on a fact-based level. It also makes me concerned for the amount of smoke in the detectives' room. Is this cigarette smoke or did someone leave a toaster on? There is A LOT of smoke.

I'm not typically a fan of the mockumentary talking head, but somehow this film doesn't really feel that way. I'm not sure how it feels. My take on it is that it's actually two guys in a pub philosophising about something they've read in the paper. Their own back-seat psuedo-detective personalities place them in this world within their own minds, desperately trying to illustrate their theories as they become less and less likely. It's as if someone took an authentic, pre-existing conversation and produced a film around it, recontextulising it ALA Aardman's Creature Comforts or The Ricky Gervais Show. Whether or not this is intentional, I feel like it really works and would have paid off so well to see them in a pedestrian environment at the end.

The flashback/cutaway/musings work so well. They feel rooted in late 90s pop culture - you wouldn't steal a car/crimewatch - and those bullet-time shots are an all-timer of a decision in my book. Absolutely nuts to include them just for the fun of it.

YFC's questionably sponsored product placement was a wonderful and completely unnecessary addition that I'm here for.

The performances were excellent. Downplayed and authentic, I don't know if it was fully improvised, or they took liberties with the script and riffed on it, or they're just that good. Either way they worked brilliantly.

The mixed media approach with loads of different techniques and stop motion animation was super effective. From a production standpoint I could have possibly done with a little more coherency from the shooting style in the detective scenes. Locked off/shaky handheld/zooms etc all mixed together pulled me out of that space stylistically. But just a touch. I also would have loved for that blind shutter gobo to be a tad defocussed and for the smoke to catch some of that light. But I did appreciate how it was a cool blue light to suggest the moon which so many people fail to think about!

A great film that will almost certainly make at run at the regional finals.

Side note - it really made me laugh that the "fireproof" shoes were made from vegan leather, a material commonly produced with petroleum-based plastics.

What I Liked:
Great to see a creative swing taken on the hacker genre by going for something more personal in what is being hacked – memories in this case, so to say goodbye properly. It’s a selfish motive but completely understandable! The tech itself was not overexplained - in fact, it was quickly shown and easily understood. Great! Nicely shot and edited together with just a couple of clunky moments at the start of the “in limbo” scenes.

Take it or leave it:
This concept is nothing new (see Ghost, What Dreams May Come, Afterlife) – all about the difficulty of letting go or getting one more chance to say goodbye. I’m a relatively hardened soul when it comes to grief and loss, so I don’t feel much when it comes to films like these – unless it’s about children (crying, crying). I too think the use of montage was a very stock-standard way to go and typically only channeled happy memories (or limbo experiences?), which I gave similar commentary on with last year’s Screen Qweens film. Not everything has to be doom and gloom, but there’s little conflict in this film – aside from a couple of subtle looks knowing this won’t last. It’s all very beautiful times – they led a perfect life (and in death) or only chose the happy times to explore. Fair enough, but give me some darkness, some struggle, and resolve these! There must be unresolved questions still!

Final hot air:
Another really bittersweet film from this team. They play to their strengths and produce films people appreciate greatly. A good example that not everything needs to be silly, lowbrow fun. Great work!

What I liked:
This is really well done and probably the most enjoyable from the genre I’ve seen this year. Well-acted, good pacing, nice lighting, and a dark story that was really well told. The script works nicely and is both funny and tragic. A dude personally aggrieved by the most trivial things, real or imagined, is very close to my heart!

Take it or leave it:
My only note here is one I often give with this genre. The casting does work, and I’m sure the detective look is all part of his vibe, again real or imagined, but it all could have been more neo-noir. And less crime board on a wall. (Man, I hate those things!) You could have told the same story, with the same aesthetic, without the classic detective thing going on. More Sin City than Maltese Falcon, but even Shadow of a Doubt would do. Look, I don’t even know how old most of this team is, but play to your youthful strengths in the world of adults if you wish, but not as adults. Just my thing.

Final hot air:
Great film and I hope it gets beyond the shortlist. Superb mahi!

What I liked:
Funny, of course, and a nicely paced political advertisement. Ridiculous imagery and claims. The tossing of the North Island into the sea and resulting realisation of what that might mean for the people living there was a great touch. Nicely filmed, edited and wonderfully myopic.

Take it or leave it:
Piece-to-camera political PSA/mockumentary. Slight eye-roll but it is fun. A one-person on a mission to destroy the North Island may have shown more ambition. I know that’s not what you were going for, but you still have thrown the North Island into the sea!

Final hot air:
Fun and quirky as normal from Toot Toot. Love ya mahi!

Reading through these reviews, I'm reminded of Sherlock Holmes, the fictional legend who rebelled against his creator, for he could not be bound by the chains of death. Just as Sir Arthur Conan Doyle tried for eight long years to hold his creation within the grave, but ultimately failed, one can't help but wonder if the legendary Larvae Girl is destined for resurrection by the baying of her loyal 48Hours fans.

It's impressive how much Herms Heroes (from the creators of Hindsight Productions) can cram into a five-minute film. So much action. So much drama. So much spectacle. So much colour. So much ethereal aura. So many characters and locations. So much cringing at gore and broken bones. Too much purity. Just enough haunting opera. And almost enough pretty hand-drawn animations that embody Larvae Girl's true superpower: retro analogue vibes.

My favourite line of the competition this year is "Revenge me!" because of course Tony Chestnut isn't educated enough to swap out the noun for the verb, and of course I'm enough of a snob to mock him for his dying words. But what a delight it was to see our beloved Tony on the big screen, and what a shock to see him shot so soon!

48Hours is getting so meta and I love it. So many in-jokes. I'm 200% behind you Larvae Girl. It isn't self-indulgent to serve your community!

This film (or a prototype) could have benefited from a bit of what we in the survey industry call cognitive testing. In other industries it's called user experience testing. And in the film industry it's called a test audience. Anyway, the point I'm trying to get to with all this wankery is… I'm not very observant and so I didn't scratch my sniff card when I was meant to. When Tony Chestnut was wafting doughnuts and colas under his nose, I was thinking "Hmm, this would be a good time to have the audience scratch their sniff cards, but I can't see any numbers on the screen so I'm going to stubbornly keep watching the action." Minutes later, when I finally saw a number at the bottom-left of the screen, I thought "Hmm, unusual choice not to start the counting at 1." Towards the end, when 2 appeared for what I thought was the first time, I thought "These numbers are all over the place!" And when the film ended, I thought "Weird, I never got to scratch number 1." So for dolts in the audience like me, the number needed to be bigger, flashier, animated, in the middle of the screen, or accompanied by a narrator yelling out the number with the hyper-masculine hyper-American energy of a WWE commentator.

I leave it with you, oh mighty Herms Heroes, to decide whether to heed Conan Doyle's advice: "my literary energies should not be directed too much into one channel" and "If I had never touched Holmes, who has tended to obscure my higher work, my position in literature would at the present moment be a more commanding one."

Long may flashy camp crowd-pleasing 48Hours films continue!

What I liked:
Great setup, and overall the film gave me some “Chicken” by Nuggets from 2024 vibes. The initial attacks in the house are brutal. Loved the “It was just a joke” line – heard this so many times! Also loved the silliness of the 8-bit game sequence, but also so very glad that you didn’t stay with this, because the rest of the outside fighting is so good. Well shot, okay sound, and there’s some effective editing. It’s lots of fun and OTT.

Take it or leave it:
The head slam on the table was one thing, but the slapping of the sister was something else altogether and may turn some people off. Sometimes, and inconsistently, this competition can be more conservative than you may think. I loved it as it immediately raised the stakes massively and even made me gasp! Smartly, you then transitioned to the video game scene, which may have softened the blow for some. A work-on is your sound, which played a bit variable, and you could have gone harder with some of the sound FX.

Final hot air:
I really enjoyed this (one of my 2026 favs), and I think you were unlucky not to make the shortlist. Great stuff!

Mon Amour unfolds at a nice pace, steadily revealing the key characters and plot details. Suddenly, everyone is assembled for the will reading. Nicely executed! It must have taken quite some writing and rehearsal to pull it all off. Well done for roping in that many actors and successfully directing them all.

We suddenly hear muffled piano when we enter the house. It suddenly gets louder when the lounge door is opened, and louder again when we enter the lounge. This is a really nice touch.

We witness the witty spats of a family of brats. There are some great jokes, puns, and flauntings of wealth and ingratitude.

I find myself wondering, since Jayden gets a 20% share in Theodore Windsor's prized yacht, who gets the other 80%? I can't help but briefly notice the cinematographer's reflection in the window of a kitchen cupboard.

One-shot is a tricky genre, but gives a pleasing result as we weave in and out of the interactions of lots of different characters. It reminds me of live theatre I saw at Riccarton House where the audience could move between the rooms at will to take in different parallel scenes – but of course this is quicker and more controlled.

Great marrying of house, script, and characters in this film!

Nice name for the film, and nice idea to have some shock factor upon the reveal of the "painting" – though the sketch felt maybe too ludicrous. I wonder if the shock factor could have been heightened by having a real painting that was nevertheless incriminating in some way, or just really terrible.

Throughout the film, conversations about the painting got lost in the busy dialogue. It would have been nice to see more purposeful foreshadowing of the painting so that we the audience were on the edge of our seats to see it. It would also have been nice for the relationship between Katerina Jones and Theodore Windsor to be built up over the course of the film, rather than revealed suddenly in a line of dialogue immediately before the painting was revealed. Perhaps then we could have inferred more about whether Katerina was Theodore's true amour, whether in death he did something deliberately to hurt her, and why.

I enjoyed this film and the eclectic nature of the one-take genre. Well done!

A cool concept. Great performances. Great art direction. A nice pace. Nice lighting. Great use of the portrait for foreshadowing and for building a sinister feeling.

I enjoy the use of sound effects and sparse dialogue to imply a story that we don't see. The "tenant" concept is a little confusing but I think I get the idea. Certainly the sparse sinister elements in this film paint a clear picture in my mind of what is going on, which is exceptionally good storytelling and film-making (regardless of whether my interpretation is "correct").

At times the camera focus isn't as seamless and smooth as one might hope, which highlights the immense challenge of the one-take genre.

I reckon the sound mix needs some attention, as some of the dialogue is too quiet compared with the sound effects. The rumble in particular is exceptionally loud when played through a subwoofer.

I enjoyed this film and I'm looking forward to seeing more from you, Little Frog Studio!

Such a good film! Great concept and really well executed. The performances are on point and perfectly kiwi.

A more light-hearted take on the culty themes that I raised in my own film, and which come up often in 48Hours. But this really turned the idea of cults on its head. Usually they're big on recruiting. This one absolutely isn't recruiting, making it so ludicrous that the cult even exists and has members. Usually they're so earnest on their beliefs, yet this cult leader will disavow them just to get the potential new recruit off his back. Usually they're a crock of shit, yet this cult turns out to be right on the money. I will admit though, it feels quite culty to target such arbitrary parts of modern culture as lululemon and matcha and blame them on the Government.

I love seeing how passionate the recruit is about every grizzly task assigned to him. The bootlicking gets a visceral reaction of disgust from the audience. Hey, I'm into it!