The Raiders constantly attack the city of New Haven, trying to take more victims. Alec is just a regular citizen trying to make his way in the world, but he get accidentally caught in the conflict and wants to join the New Haven Defense army. However, they are skeptical of his abilities due to his handicap but give him a shot. Together, will the team be able to stave off the coming Raider onslaught?
Production Quality (2 points)
This production is fairly good overall despite a few concerns. One of these is a soundtrack that sometimes overpowers other sounds, but most of the audio is acceptable. Video quality and camera work are professional. Sets, locations, and props, though they are limited in scope, are well-utilized. Some of the editing is a bit choppy at times, but all production elements improve with time. Thus, an above-average score is warranted here.
Plot and Storyline Quality (1.5 points)
Much like The Runner From Ravenshead, The Defense of New Haven crafts an intriguing world for its story and creatively applies a parable/allegory to the narrative. A major drawback, however, is the characters could have been better developed. As they are, the characters have some believable motivations and slightly developed personalities but lack true arcs and feel one-dimensional due to some unsubstantial dialogue. Surprisingly, the plot is fairly complex due to the well-developed premise and advanced spiritual lessons. Nonetheless, this complexity is also a negative as there’s too much content, which leads to a very rushed conclusion after some time is wasted in the film’s first half. The writers try to use off-screen content to make up for lost time, but it’s not enough to keep the ending from being abrupt and crammed. Moreover, the storyline scores enough wins to be rated average.
Acting Quality (1.5 points)
Just as The Runner from Ravenshead had a cast composed entirely of kids, The Defense of New Haven follows the same model. This makes the performances hard to quantify, but most of the time, they seem to be on point with line delivery and emotions. Some of the cast member reuse can be redundant, and this overuse can cause smaller roles to suffer in quality. Nonetheless, this section is at least average.
This creative team is definitely doing the best that they can do with what they have. Now that they’ve made two movies using a similar formula, it’s likely time to step out and try something more ambitious. At the very least, they could provide valuable screenwriting skills to a field that’s starving for substantial narratives. It will be interesting to see what they can come up with next.
Final Rating: 5 out of 10 points